Uh so this is the opening of the North Conservation Commission meeting for Monday, October 6th at 6:30 p.m. This is a hybrid meeting that has been conducted both in town hall and on Zoom. Um the
members participating tonight thus far are myself, Julian Kate's chair, uh Dan Pearson, who is I guess the clerk. >> Yes. Yes. who just joined. >> Oh, Lisa just joined. Okay. Uh we also
have Mark Fernandez, uh Lisa Corrosa who is vice chair and Courtney Miller. Uh and we have our director John Hollis and our assistant uh Megan Har as well. So, first item on
the agenda is meeting minutes of 9:22. Fairly uh voluminous but non-controversial. Anyone have any comments about um those minutes? And if there are no comments, I think we
can consider a motion to approve the minutes as submitted. >> So move. >> Uh we have a motion from Mark. Did I hear a second? >> Courtney. >> Um and a second from Courtney. Uh roll
call vote. Dan and Courtney. Any vote? Oh, Dan seems to be frozen for the moment. Um, so, uh, Mark I. >> And I'll throw in an I. Um,
I don't know. We may have to get Dan's vote. >> We're going to have to >> in a moment. Uh, and Lisa, we're going to record you as an abstension. Is that fair? >> Stay. Yes. >> Um, all right. So, we'll as soon as Dan
can get unlocked. It reminds me of the Star Wars movie. Get out of that material, but uh whatever. >> Um so, our next item
is um violations and I guess number one is 93 King Phillip Road. So, I'll speak on that. Please >> introduce yourself then. Sure. Go ahead. >> Uh, I'm I'm Michael Cahill. from the uh
PE for Zach Reed and Brian and we met out at the site with uh Brad Holmes, our wetlands consultant of ERC, and with John last Tuesday, and we went
into some detail about the deliverables for this meeting that would get us through the fall winter with some stabilization at the site. until we could begin the uh restoration in the spring. Um
I'm going to have Jenna Boyven, my environmental scientist, do the presentation, but I'll just preface it with we really only have two loose threads at this point. We're still working on the survey that ERC will overlay the restoration plan onto and
then um it's within a week or two uh I'll convey to John the notice of intent date. Uh so those are the two things that are still kind of outstanding but um in process.
So, I'll turn it over to Jana at this point and she'll run down our plan that uh we agreed we agreed on two weeks ago that we would have for this this time. >> So, let's briefly go over the restoration and mitigation plan. So,
we'll just run through the um next slide, please, through the wet sketch um order of actions this fall, order of actions in the spring um as well as the NOI proposal and the timeline. So, just as a note um we're still um as of the
date of this submitt um to Mr. Thomas for review by commission, we're still expecting the um the land um map. >> Yes, correct. Yeah, >> but but uh that note up there indicated that we were waiting on uh the memo
which we did receive actually late Friday afternoon. So we got it over to John this morning >> and we'll give a little detail on that and here it's >> our our uh restoration plan was updated today. So it was >> yes just like time frames.
>> Yeah. So just to go over the property um from A1 to A4 and from B1 to B3 that's EVW um and then from IB1 to IB4 that is the ordinary high water inland bank area.
Then next slide. So the ordered options for the fall. So with within areas A1 through A4 and B1 through B3, there will be straw water placements um and that will um provide short-term stabilization um including
erosion and sedimentation control throughout the winter time. Next slide please. And then um for the upland area um also starting in the fall um there will be winter rye planting which will also
provide short-term stabilization um including sedimentation control throughout the winter time. Um next slide please. So then starting in the spring after everything is buttoned up throughout the fall and winter time um in the BB in the
BBW areas um we will then begin native vegetative species planting um and the effects of this will be long-term stabilization including erosion prevention and sedimentation prevention um and that will be checked up upon um
within the future. Um and the plant list will be chosen um from the freshwater buffer plant list um via UMass Amherst landscape nursery and urban forestry program resource. Um so that has yet to be decided. Um and then in the upland area that in the springtime that's when
lom and compost spreading will be implemented as well as the planting of it's called natural perfection seed mixture which includes marco polo sheep fescue reliant ivy hard fescue viking h2o hard fescue as well as observe sheet
fescue which all have very high germination rates and which are very very hardy grasses that should um provide um stabilization fairly quickly. Next slide please. >> So then within the notice of intent um
the first project would be the reetment removal um which will then turn into the seated foyer log implementation um as well as patio removal um which previous papers will then be implemented. Um so the projected start time for this
would also be the springtime. Um so short-term impact there will be some bank destabilization but there will be many many mitigation um methods that can be um accompanied within this um to prevent erosion and sedimentation into
the pond. So the long-term impact of this will not just be aesthetic value for the property but also bank stabilization um increased diverse native vegetation increased soil structure and increased buffer zone. Next slide, please.
So, this is the draft restoration sketch that Brad Holmes provided with us. Um, so as you can see with everything that I just described, you can kind of visualize it a little bit more. Um, so where we would be removing the concrete and replacing with the koer logs. Um,
and the other area with the native planting strips. um as well as replacing the patio and also the area where we'll be rolling and seating in the spring. Next slide, please. So, here's a timeline of everything um
just so we can kind of grasp our heads around it. So, in the fall, that's when stabilization will take place for the fall and winter time. Um as well as the survey and reveation plan which we just um presented. Then uh the fall is also
when we would like to um submit our NOI proposal. Then in the winter um we hope that's when we would receive the NOI decision. And then in the spring that's when reveation um would take place and as well as the retaining wall removal
and had your removal um upon the NOI. >> Um and then in the following years um just the site progress and checking in with you guys. Uh, next slide. >> Um, any questions?
>> Uh, John, do you have any comments? >> No, I had a very um, you know, good conversation with the applicant and, um, their consultants when I was out there. This kind of covers everything that I think the commission and I brought up at
the at the meeting that we had. Um, you know, obviously the the intent here is to overly, you know, I guess improve the existing conditions and try to more naturalize what was out there. So I think if the applicant
pursues this as the restoration avenue, I think then for instance, we could potentially allow for some of these activities to occur. Uh but then also they'd have to submit an application for notice of intent application to do the work to the revelment wall. I think
their intent is to remove it. So you know obviously that's going to require a little bit more of a permit side of things. Um but the restoration efforts I think are definitely going to be uh an overall improvement to the existing conditions of how it is right now. But they are going to stabilize the area
which is definitely something that we talked and discussed with the commission. So that is something they're looking to do in the interim while we wait for any sort of planting in the spring. >> All right. Any uh questions from members
of the commission? >> Um yeah, I have a question. Can you just back on the slide for a second? >> Thank you. So, are you waiting to prepare a plan for landscape contractor for fall 25 and final notice of intent
or you just going to proceed with those stabilization measures? Well, >> Lisa, we um just received a memo, a detailed memo from uh Brad Holmes of >> ECR,
>> ECR, sorry, of VCR late Friday and it's three or four pages. Uh that's got the plan in it. Um so we have that plan. It was just too voluminous to include in this and show up on the screen as
something in addition to read, you know, something else to read. It would have taken a few minutes to read through it if you'd like if it's okay. >> Yeah. >> Could uh I I sent it to John this morning uh early this morning. Uh we could share that with you.
>> Well, I just I just don't want the filing of the notice of intent to hold up this work. >> Yeah, understood. Uh, right. So, because you're going to miss the window for planting. So, for instance, does the plan show winter by um application rate?
Does it show a straw waddle? By the way, it's W A T L E. It's a waddle. Uh, does it show a size for the waddle? Um, because I'm just wondering if you just should be implementing those sooner rather than later instead of waiting for
a notice of intent. >> No, that's a good point. Um Aaron, I think we talked about John. >> Yeah. So what Brad told me was that he was going to do a double row of compost sock as the water that you're talking
about and that the rate of the >> he didn't give a rate but he did say that the entire area which has been disturbed that he doesn't anticipate like for instance the I guess the westerly side of the area if we go back to that I guess diagram you want to just
pull so that whole kind of curve area there >> that whole area is going to be laden with uh the rye the area that is the lman seed to the south that actually is going to be restored because they don't intend to do any work in that area for their notice of intent application.
>> So you know I told them that you know it it seems silly to have to restore the area on the the westerly side you know because we know that you guys are going to come in with a notice of intent to rip out that revetment wall and put in four logs. You know you're just be
basically duplicating your efforts. So, why not put something in that's going to just hold that embankment and soil in place >> um through the winter until you come back in the spring and reveate the area, >> right? I guess the disconnect for me is
having to wait for us to issue an order of conditions to restore something that could be done immediately and should be done immediately. So you're saying that >> so you're saying the disconnect is the fact that um you feel that they should I
guess restore the whole entire area >> restore whatever could create any sediment laden runoff that is not stabilized today. So it sound like the native planting strip. >> So I'm just saying without a notice of
intent from because it's restoration right of a violation. So right >> they miss the window. Yeah. So if they miss the window in October, the seed's not going to take. So I'm just saying, is there any reason why they just can't go and put the the core logs in or the
straw waddles in and uh and put the rye down? >> Yeah, I think that's that's the intent that they they positioned with this with this as part of the the project is that they're going to do the LMAN seed near the native planting strip to the south. that's going to be all taken care of
with the the the native um or buffer enhancement seed that I suggested to them. But then the winter rye section to the I guess it would be the northwest that kind of curve area. They're going to do that winter rye and but they're also going to put these sediment
controls around the uh establish the work area as part of this project. So, I guess that that's kind of what I what I told them would be better because for instance, if they come in in the spring and they get a notice of intent, they're just going to be ripping up that area to
do the work again. >> But how long is it going to take? All right, here's my concern. How long is it going to take them to get another 10 date? Cuz if they miss the next couple of weeks, it's going to be too late. So, my suggestion is to go in, put the
ride down, put the straw waddles in now to prevent that from from moving along. >> Yeah, I think that that's what they're going to do. >> They're waiting for the notice of intent. >> No, they don't they don't need a notice of intent. This is without a permit. >> So, Lisa, as I understand it, you're
concerned about stabilization as I think all of us are. And I I and I agree getting the uh the center control and the seed down now is the thing to do without a permit. >> Yes.
>> Right. Okay. Okay. I'm sorry. I thought you were waiting for them to file the notice for them to be allowed to put the seat in the water. >> No, the only thing we're waiting on is for when they decide they want to remove the rebetment wall. That's the the Okay. >> The trigger is that and also the
pavement removal. >> Yep. Okay. Thank you. >> You're welcome. Uh any other questions among commission members? Uh if not, any questions from anybody in the meeting? And you can do that by just
taking your mic off mute and identifying yourself or here in the meeting raising your hand. Um, and if not, I think we've heard the plan. Uh,
and we can have you guys go forward. Thank you. Uh, in agreement. >> Yes. I think, you know, obviously, Mike, I think the the next steps are for you to let me know when you guys plan on coming in with that notice of intent. Y, >> but in the interim, you know, our next
meeting is going to be November 10th. Y >> I'd like to see a lot of progress made out there >> and I want basically to be able to assure the commission by the next meeting that the sediment controls are in. >> Okay. >> And all the seed is down >> for the areas that we just discussed.
>> Very good. Uh I see that Dan is back in the meeting. So I I don't know if I don't know if you you're on mute, Dan. So I just want to uh pull you with regard to your vote on the minutes. Uh, is that a Have we Okay, so Dan can be
recorded as an I for the minutes. >> I >> uh All right. So, next item is 181 West Main Street. Uh, also a a violation. Do we have a representative or what's the plan of
representative on the call? Yeah. Thank you. [Music] >> I see John. Johnny, can you hear us? >> Yes. My name is uh John Kelty and um uh
I'm representing uh uh Hatishk Kumar uh Patel who is the uh the uh party um who has been given notice uh and that notice by the way was back in August and since
then we've uh been uh attempting to engage an engineer. We do uh we are uh keenly aware of the the violation. The violation is uh building a small patio uh within the jurisdiction of uh the
conservation commission. Uh we have uh uh we are potentially violating uh we are uh on notice of a violation of the uh Rivers Act. uh and uh John I did send
a letter asking that this uh matter be continued but at the same time uh was able to have a some correspondence and discussion with John Thomas and uh John uh pointed out that
John >> pardon uh no I I think that was just noise in the system. Go ahead with your presentation. So it it was pointed out to us that we are uh in a position where
we could be um hit with daily fines. Uh and my hope is that we not uh be uh uh given an enforcement order this evening. Uh we do uh expect that we're going to
have to um replace our septic system. that will uh require a filing along with uh our filing of uh of uh the location of the patio and whatever mitigation we're going to propose. I do believe
that if we uh do need to replace our septic system, which will not meet uh title 5 uh testing or requirements, uh the unit was uh located there in something like 1976.
Um I believe that if the uh a new septic system uh needs to be um provided and constructed, it'll be in the front of the building. will need to um pump our effluent to the front of the building.
Uh whereas now it goes in the back. Uh the existing um um area uh would need to be removed. Um, so we would have a pretty uh significant filing with the conservation which I would hope uh would
cover both the new SE septic system and uh and would uh also account for um uh what has occurred uh out there at present which is the addition of the uh the addition of the patio. So, I'm
hopeful uh that you'll uh continue this matter to your next meeting on November 10th, which uh I would hope to have engaged our uh our engineers and and have a um a plan such as was presented
to you um just uh just uh before this matter. I do know that they're responding under an order under an enforcement order and as such uh we're uh under a notice of violation. So we
would uh actually be uh looking for a um uh filing a notice of uh a notice of intent and looking for an order of condition. >> We we we are aware of all that. Uh the
question is we want to see some progress. Yes, you have a project but you when are you going to engage an engineer is is kind of the question really in front of my mind. I mean this has been going on for a long time. Do have you been talking >> it's been going on since August. You're
correct. >> Have you been talking with engineers because >> Yes, we have. We have two proposals. I believe within the next uh two days we will uh select one and um and uh we will move forward. >> All right. Well, I think
>> I don't believe there's any damage taking place. All right. >> The activities that have occurred, I'm I'm u thankful for that. >> Yeah. But at this phase, we know work has to be done. But the way
forward is to get the engineer to define the nature of the work and then present it to us in a filing. And and so you know all that other discussion is really irrelevant until you have an engineer that can put
together a comprehensive plan and then we can assess it as to whether it meets the requirements the wetland protection act and the rivers act. Um, so >> today being Monday, we will engage before weeks end. >> Okay. Uh, John, you have any comment?
>> No, I just, you know, informed the applicant that it's been a while and, you know, the commission gets tired of these things when they don't see progress. So, you know, the commission is at their discretion to issue an enforcement order if they find it, you
know, reasonable. I mean, I'm I'm understanding of difficulties out there, but um but you got to you got to really make an effort. Um >> I understand. So, >> and and I presume you have made an
effort, but but uh I mean, I'm I I would say >> we've got to follow through. I I would certainly be tolerant and and say fine, let's hopefully be looking at the skeleton at
least of a filing uh with a plan on uh November 10. Um but if you if you don't I I think I would would agree with John my my patience is
get would get kind of thin. at that point. >> I appreciate that and uh as I've said, we will engage before weeks end and have material for you at your next meeting. >> Uh any uh questions from commission
members. >> All right. you you have heard uh our preference and we'll we'll look forward to uh some information I shouldn't say on paper but uh on the screen
>> uh that we evaluate >> um and this is not really a public hearing so I don't have an obligation to open it up to meeting okay >> you do not >> all right fair enough so we will see you on uh November number 10.
Thank you. Um, we have voted in the past on a continuation of, uh, file number 250-1180, uh, 61 West Main Street, which is the,
um, Honeydew Delment site, I believe. >> That's correct. Um, and they previously have been continued until November 10th, so we don't have to act on that. Uh, and then we have next listed an Eagle Scout
project for the Leo Yale Conservation Area. Do we have a presenter or >> Yes. Um, yeah, my name is Sam. >> Okay. Um, I'm a lifelong resident of Norin and I've been a troop 12 scout
since 2014. Um, I'm doing my Eagle Scout project and what I chose to do is blaze and repair the bridges up in the Leo GL conservation area off of Freeman Street. >> Okay. Um, I've been managing my project since
about the end of August and I've been trimming the trails, cutting fallen trees that have fallen in the past, and measuring wood that needs to be replaced on the bridges. Um, right now I'm in the process of getting the last piece of wood I need from um,
National Lumber. I've got I've got donated wood from uh Home Depot, most of it, but I need one more support beam. And um I've also reached out for volunteers from my fellow troop members,
family, and friends over the past few weeks. Um I just finished um disassembling the first bridge that I need. I'm doing two bridges. I just finished disassembling the first bridge and there's caution
tape around it and there's space to walk around it right now. Um, but over the next couple weeks I need volunteers um to help out with the project before snow before snow falls. Um, I need
volunteers volunteers in order to finish blazing the trail by adding trail markers and finish clear uh clearing the trail. Um, I'm also trying to get an updated sign from um, Jenny Wisman, who is a neighbor of mine, who said she has
an updated sign for the trail. Um, I also need volunteers that are able to help with uh, pull up the damaged wood pieces from the bridges and nail in the new pieces. Preferably people that are
um, that know about um, like bridges and stuff. Um, I will have the wood out by the bridges when we are out there. And we I'm going to be out there this Sunday, October 12th, from 1 to 4:00 p.m. and
also Monday morning at 10:00 a.m. And then I will continue that um August 19th, also on a Sunday and Sunday, August 26th. >> I think uh October. >> Oh, you mean October or S? >> October. Sorry. Yeah.
>> Um, and if anyone would like to reach out to me, you can contact Mr. Thomas and uh at the conservation department and my troop leader, Miss Spart, uh, via our Facebook page. >> So, I'm presuming you're you're also uh
talking to other people in your troop and and looking for these resources as well. >> Yes, of course. >> Okay. Um, I have all the I'll have all the wood and all the nails. And I'll also bring food and water out and stuff. Um,
I just need um a little more manpower cuz my troop's pretty small. You know what I mean? >> Okay. >> So, >> Sam, I will do what I can with the resources that I have of uh volunteers and I will let them know. You just send
me an email when you want some support and I'll see if anybody's available. Okay. >> Okay. Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> Have a good night. >> Thank you. >> Great project. >> Thank you. >> Is uh does anyone have any questions about it? >> Um one quick question for me. How many
volunteers do you think you need and when have you sort of put together from a project management perspective? On X date I need four. on why they I need, you know, five other people and and what the order of operations is.
>> Yeah. So, um the past couple times I've been out there, I've just been uh like clearing the trail, which I haven't needed that many volunteers because I've already went through it a bunch. So, for the next couple weeks, I'll probably need about
6 to 10, I would say, volunteers cuz the first bridge we're doing isn't that that big, but the second bridge is long and also higher. >> Yeah, that bridge that bridge is pretty significant. Has anyone been out there from the commission? >> Not recently.
>> Okay. This this this whole bridge system is extensive >> and it's getting rickety. >> And it's getting rickety. Well, it's been out there for 15 years, and you know, >> wood does rot over time, so >> Okay. >> All right, Sam. Well, that's great. Why don't you send me um the email list of
what you need for certain days, and I will distribute to our conservation commission members and also reach out to some other volunteers that I share similar interest with with trail maintenance. Okay. >> Okay. Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> I'll get that out as soon as possible.
>> All right. Thank you. Thanks, Ed. >> All right, 376 Old Colony Road update. Have we um sorted through the availability of adequate?
>> So, I I've received a list um from the consultants wetland scientist. They said that they were going to send over a final list of the actual vegetation. they're going to be getting.
They said they had to make a few modifications to some of the plant species. They asked me for suggestions. I said, you know, you can duplicate the species. Um but, you know, from what was initially um I guess proposed to the commission, I
said try to keep it as similar as possible that you can. Um you can make minor adjustments to the vegetation. Um, but I'm still waiting on that list. But they did say that they were out there putting down the seed and um, basically manicuring the area for winter
stabilization. So, I think they're processing some of the plants that they can right now, but there's a couple on back order that they're still waiting for. So, >> all right. So, things are going forward. >> Things are moving forward in the positive direction. So, I'm hopeful that, for instance, that can get done
and then we can potentially wait the 2-year period for monitoring in that mitigation area and then, for instance, they can be released of that enforcement order that was done back in the '90s. Okay. All right. Uh so we're now moving on to
our continued public hearings, but uh we have um three that have requested continuation. So I think we need to do that first. Uh the first is uh the 49 island road
project file number 250 uh 1186. They have requested a continuation until November 10th. >> Yeah. So moved. >> Second. >> We have a motion by Dan, seconded by Lisa, Mark, and Dan. How do you vote?
>> I >> I. >> And Lisa and Courtney. >> I. >> And I'll throw in an eyes. The motion carries. Uh the next um hearing requesting a continuation is file number
250-118865 Hill Street. something we actually haven't opened yet, but uh they want to continue until 11:10. >> Was that a so move? Dan did >> I'm sorry. >> Yes.
>> Sure. >> Okay. >> All right. I will second. >> We got a motion by Dan, seconded by Lisa, Mark, and Dan. How do you vote? I >> Well, Dan, you look frozen. Was that a Was that a yes and I?
>> I. >> Okay, there you go. Uh, Lisa and Courtney. >> I I >> And I'll throw in an I. Motion carries. Next item is file number 250- 1190 63 Hill Street. Also a new project.
We have an open. They're requesting continuation until November 10th. So moved. >> Second. >> We have a motion by Dan, seconded by Mark, Dan, and Lisa. How do you vote? >> I
>> I >> and Mark and Cart >> I. >> I. >> And I'll throw in an I. Motion carries. Uh so we're now de back to uh our previously continued public
hearings. uh 0 street file number 250- uh 1178 and we have a representative looks like here in the room and so when you start just identify
yourself and go from my name is Mark with guard consulting here on behalf of um Jar uh for the project at zero Leonard Street in Northern um I do have um a color plan here. Although I um I wasn't sure if you want me to share my screen
or >> share your screen. >> Okay, let me give you sharing. I send a request to share. >> You should be all set. >> Great. Excellent. So, I'm just going to walk the commission back to where we started just because it's been a while since the
commission has been um heard this project. So, just to backtrack. So this is um zero Leonard Street in Norton. Um it has several wetland resource areas. So I'm going to walk through the existing conditions and then walk through what's proposed after that. So we have several things. We have a the
canoe river in the uh far back of the property in the southern portion of the property that checks a riverfront area um onto the property. There's also um bordering land to flooding on the property and there's also uh wetlands with the 100 foot buffer zone as well. So the property and the discussion is
mostly going to be focused on the northeast northwest corner of the property uh where there is an upland uh meadow area that is also within um the uh buffer zone and also bordering land to flood uh that flood plan is set by FEMA elevation 73.5
um as set by um the uh NAB datims by FEMA and the surveyor has uh prepared an existing business plan and proposed plan that reflects those datams to show the current flood plane. main location on the property. I'm going to go to the second sheet which shows a zoom in of
that northwest corner of the property and this is that upland meadow here. Um all work is proposed outside the riverfront area outside the buffer zone. Um the only work that is proposed to be within jurisdictional areas is the bordering land so flooding which is elevation 73.5.
You can see that on here as this dotted plan starting where my cursor is in the top right corner and working our way down. You'll see it does a little zigzag. It runs this direction here, along here, and then runs around this hatch area here and then out here. So,
that's the existing flood plane elevation. The proposed project is to regrade the flood plane um elevation to allow the proposed house to be built outside the flood plane while also providing compensatory storage as required by uh 310 CMR 1057. Uh we are
outside the 10-year flood plane so there is uh presumed no impact to wildlife habitat uh per DP's wildlife guidance. The project does propose um compensatory storage in a um uh 1 ft intervals which
is what's required um per the regulations. We have those tables provided on the plans um in the top right corner here uh where you can see the cuts and the fills that are occurring within the flood plan at each elevation from elevation 72 to 73 and 73
to 73.5. There's no grading work occurring below elevation 72. Um the uh we did also submit a revised WPA form 3 to the commission. So that way um that form is now accurate to what's being proposed which shows uh the work in VLSF
to be 12,960 ft. The uh fill to be 2267 ft and the uh replacement to be 3,617 cubic feet. So there's a net volume increase of about,000 cubic feet of
volume in the flood plane from the proposed project. We did propose propose um conservation signs around the um the property. I'm actually going to jump to a little colored plan that I have here with me in person as well um just to show a little bit of a better idea of
what's going on. The um the uh these conservation signs are highlighted in green basically to basically one demarcate the buffer zone also demarcate the uh the backyard and also demarcate the sides of the yard. That way you have a nice kind of demarcated limit of lawn
that's um basically protecting the BLS areas on both right and the left um and also protecting the buffer zone from being encroached on in the future. Um again the house is proposed outside the flood plane. Um so we don't have to um
um I should say so um that's a separate matter. So um so we don't have to uh we provide storage for the fill that's occurring. You can see here um this pink line is the original flood plane line and then as you walk your way back this blue line is the new flood plane line that's being pulled back. So you can see
generally speaking there's 1,000 cubic feet of volume. You can see the actual increase in the flood plane area. Um and the volumes were were calculated by myself um um using DP methods. Um so that's a net summary of of the work. Again, no work in the buffer zone roof
area only in BLSF. Um we provide commission storage um as required at those 1 foot intervals. Um and we believe this project does comply with the regulatory requirements of the weapons protection. >> How much John? I have many, but I don't
I'm gonna let the commission I know Lisa probably has a couple comments. >> Um >> um I just from the yard it says sediment controls. What What are the sediment controls?
>> The sediment controls are going to be a staked compost beret of a filter that's 8 in in diameter. All right. Um, other questions from commission members. >> So, yeah, I have a few. Um, so did you
say that the house was outside of flood zone? >> The house is proposed to be constructed outside the flood zone. Yes. >> Well, that's not what I'm seeing. the the new new established flood plane. >> Yes. Yeah. So So the pro the project
proposes to to to alter the the the flood plane location to allow the house to be built outside the flood plane. That's the project's proposal, >> right? But for the record, you're proposing a portion of a house in an existing 100-year flood zone. What you
just said. >> Correct. True. Yeah. Yeah. Correct. Yeah. If if that if that in that nuance >> we don't talk we don't talk future flood zone when you're finished filling. We talk about existing conditions versus the flood zone. So for the record a
portion of this house looks like it's in the flood zone. Um that said so it looks like you're going to allow up to a foot of water in this backyard. So potentially right so the flood zone is at 73 and a half. Nothing's making
that go away. And you're lowering the elevation or your spot shot out there to 72. So the person's going to have a foot of water in their backyard when the flood hits. >> That that's possible. Yes. >> Yeah. That's what I'm saying. Yeah.
Because normally what you would do is you would fill so that the backyard is not flood zone, but then you'd have to provide more compensatory storage. Ah, I get it's highly unusual to sell a property to somebody knowing that your
backyard's going to have a foot plus water in it. That's the first comment I have. Second comment is how did you determine the extent of the regulatory flood way? >> Um the regulatory flood way is established through the FEMA maps. Um
usually it's a hatch and that is um a very interior to um the south southern portion of the property. Um as as noted by um the maps, you have the canoe river. Um the riverfront area barely
touches any upland at all and then you have the wetlands which is another 100 ft from the the river and then you have the ber zone. So um >> what did how did you establish the floodway on the property? That's my question. Did you just draw it on there? >> I believe I believe it. I believe it's
from the FEMA maps as shown. >> The FEMA maps as shown show it graphically. You need to go into the flood insurance study to figure out what the actual width is. So, I would like to see that documented. Uh, next question.
Go back to the color plan. Um, what's the backyard that you're giving them that you're putting in back there for that the foot that's going to be flooded? Are you asking about the size of it? >> Yes. >> Uh the size of that is approximately
40 by 80. No by wide by 100 by probably 40 to 50 by 80 to 100. >> Okay. >> So essentially again you're everything's going to be flooded except
the house and the septic. You're gonna have flooding in the flood compensatory flood zone which make I mean the compensatory storage areas which makes sense. So the house is going to be almost a moat. The house the only thing that's going to be um
left without flooding is the septic system in the house. Not a great design. >> If you're a king and you want a castle then yeah it's a great design, Lisa. >> Yeah. So did a PE stamp this plan?
Um, we had a PLS PLS do this plan. >> Yeah. In this case, I would ask you for an engineer to have this stamped. >> I mean, a land surveyor, a land surveyor could, but I would like an engineer to stamp the plan.
A D doesn't require that necessarily a PE provide um stamped plans for >> a flood elevation certificate would potentially need a PE. >> Correct. >> A registered landscape architect. >> Correct. >> Or a PLS.
>> Correct. And that's and that's for that's for paperwork to FEMA. Yes. >> Yes. Yes. Yes. >> So >> So is that paperwork pending? So, so this the the way this project works, Lisa, is we have to we we we we get an order of conditions, which we do believe we comply with the regulations
to allow us to fill the flood plane. What we do is we would fill the flood plane. We'd rec we construct the compensatory storage and we would do an interm as built of the flood plane to confirm that the that the the flood plane is where it's proposed and it's it's accurate. And from there, we can
file a a a map change with FEMA to to demonstrate that we're outside the flood plane in uh where everything is proposed to be where the house is proposed and where the driveway septic is proposed. Um and with that, we can build a house
without FEMA flood insurance per um um uh and and that would all be allowed basically once that map change was completed. So there's a little bit of a a phase to this um but it's not necessarily something that's unusual um with work here in the flood plan. They've done this many times.
>> So my understanding is that typically with these types of projects you would go for the letter of map revision first to establish the FEMA elevation for the project site and then once you get that then you come in to propose development because you've read then you would have
the elevation established. >> Well the elevation's been established. We have to we have to establish the new elevation by actually grading the flood plane to be where it needs to be. >> That way the map would reflect what where this elevation is shown. That's that's what has to happen. I guess FEMA has to have that data that that's where
the actual topo is. >> But then how does that work? I mean, how do they that then you're basically altering the grading and that's how you're coming up with the FEMA elevation? That seems backwards. >> No, we're not coming up with the FEMA elevation. The FEMA elevation is set by the FEMA maps and the FEMA says this is
our elevation. You do ongrade, you do on-site topo, right, >> with an with by a sur by a licensed surveyor who who follows the who who connects to the data and sets that elevation and and then and this elevation is not just drawn willy-nilly. It's it's based on the topo survey
that's on the data by that the data that FEMA uses. And so this is the elevation here. And so when you file a flood main chap, you you you tell FEMA that the flood plane is is is in this location here. So I guess before you go on your
whole spiel, um my question is have you talked to Eric Carlson about this? >> The building inspector? >> No. Eric Carlson from FEMA. Have you talked to him? >> I haven't talked to him. I know we talked to the >> I would suggest talking to him because I think he's been in conversations with the building commissioner here in town
and I think he basically gave your client clear direction. him and Eric Carlson gave them clear direction on how you can achieve, you know, potentially seeing if this lot is buildable or not. >> I don't think fabricating an elevation to and then plopping a building on top
of it is going to solve it because I'm not comfortable with advising the commission that this would be a permittable project. I'm telling you right now, I've never seen a project like this done this way. It seems weird. And we spoke to the building inspector about this and this is the this is this
that's the that's the that's what has to actually happen and so is you yeah is we actually have I've worked with FEMA before I filed >> I have email correspondents from the building administrator and Eric Carlson >> stating what needs to happen
>> I would suggest listening to what they have to say following what they have are requesting you to do to seek approval for this project I know the answer. And this is not what I want to see. I'm just telling you right now, this is not what I see. >> I I know it's an approval project
through FEMA and through the state because I've done multiple projects where we have moved the flood plane and we've built a building outside the flood plane or partially in the flood plane. Um we built them over the flood plane. Um it's it's we've done quite a few projects. So I'm I'm very used to this actual activity. So I I know it may be
unique to to it may be the first time for you, but it is something that we have done quite a bit in the past. I just find it very odd that you're going to manipulate the grades to get a buildable lot out of it. I mean, why do why haven't I seen this more often if
this is the case, right, for any FEMA project? Why is it that I don't see it in all these other flood plane projects? And how is this how is this I guess my point would be, how is this even legal to do that? Because you're manipulating the grace to get a buildable lot. The wetlands protection act allows for the
alteration of the flood plane, >> right? >> In BLSF, when you provide compensatory storage, that is what the regulations allow for. And we do this all the time. We put patios in the flood plane and we we we fill in the with a patio. We have to make a little bit of a cut. We add an addition to the back. We grade it. We
cut out the backyard to make more flood plane for the addition. Um, and that is something that we've done this. I mean, I I've done dozens of NOIs with work in the flood plane. Um and and and and it's it's that again the the purpose of this
plan is to show how we comply with the Wetlands Protection Act and its regulations. Um uh so in terms of of what if if the commission um has has has something that they're concerned about compliance with FEMA, they can definitely put a condition that the
applicant is should should should consult with FEMA to make sure that all permits have been legally required. But in terms of what we're proposing here, we provide the compensatory storage is required um to do the grading that's proposed here. Um and that's um what the
plan shows. So and and again I I understand it's it's a unique situation, but we've I I I have we've done it before and again we're not necessarily creating it's a buildable lot. You have an area for sepic system. You could build something um in a different layout but with zoning sepex and everything else. it it the most appropriate way is
is to just shape the flood plane as as we've shown it to kind of balance everything out. And so it is um unique and again we're all it's an it's an it's an existing field which is great. I've done I've done duplexes in the flood plane where we build the flood plane all the flood plane build a
building over the flood plane in a wooded lot and it was very unique. Um, >> I guess my question here though is like if you're putting a foundation in that existing soil, how are you not over excavating that subsurface area, you
know, for soil for for foundation support and and stability? You're only putting in an extra foot of fill. I mean, who's to say that foundation's going to be solid and it's not going to crack or have any sort of issues moving forward? I mean, that seems silly because you see a lot of these
constructions for houses happening, right? >> Yeah. >> And they go down how far? >> They go down four feet for for uh for for frost, right? >> So, I mean, I I have I have a degree in civil engineering. I've done foundation designs. I've worked for two and a half years for a georructural consulting company. So, I know foundation designs.
I know what structural engineers and what PES do for these kind of things. Um, so they would build they in this situation here again they would be grading out the flood plane as shown in the blue line and then they would be excavating down 4t below the finished grade around the around the foundation
itself. So they'd be going from elevation approximately around 74ish. They go down 4 ft down to down to elevation 70. They'd be in so they'd be taking out soil and removing it from the property and putting in a foundation. >> What's the depth to groundwater again?
Uh that's a good question. I do not I do not I do not let me let me let me let me hold on if you want. Let me So uh so depth of groundwater is 60 in to 50 in in the test pits which is 50 in at test fit number four. Test bit pit number
four is over here. So at elevation uh 73.75 down 50 in. Sorry I can't do that quick on my head. Um, so that's that's four feet. Four feet. So, yeah. So, elevation it's it's
uh down 69. Elevation 69. So, >> so we going to have an issue with groundwater then for the for the foundation >> if we're down 4T from elevation 74. No. >> What's the bottom of the compensatory blood storage area? Is is that going to
compete with your encounter groundwater as well? Is the is the ground water going to occupy that column instead of allowing flood plane compensation? >> No. No. Again, so the the in for example inside in in the on the um the right
side here where you see my cursor is test pit number four here groundwater is 4T deeper than that grade right now. Over 4 feet. It's 58 50 in. >> So it's it's below elevation 70 right now. That's seasonal high ground water
itself. >> And what is the bottom of the flood storage compensation going to be >> in that location? Uh it is going to be 73.25. >> So we're still 3 and 1/4 ft above season groundwater plus. So you're
>> John Thomas, if I might, I think the the the reason this is an anomaly and I', you know, doing this for a long time, is typically they would have come in and filled around the house, right? And filled the filled brought a lot of fill
in, brought everything up, including the backyard. And I think that's what we're seeing is they're actually lowering it, which is going to result in this threequarters of this yard flooding. And that's what I'm extremely uncomfortable with as a
commission member. The person that lives in this house is going to be surrounded by water when it floods >> and think maybe this is a separate question, but if that backyard does flood, where does that water go once it flood?
>> So great question. And so let's just let's just take a step back again and and think about how flood planes work. flood planes. One-year flood plane is a very it's a it's a it's a short-term event where water when it when it fill when the when the waterershed fills up completely, the canoe river overflows
its banks and floods laterally from the river towards the extent of the flood plane which is pushing up towards this area of the property and it would fill up to where the flood plane actually is. And what we've done here is we've
actually created a very nice uniformed flood plane flow path around this house. It now comes in around nice and uniformly and then it can leave nicely and uniformly as it comes. It slowly rises and slowly comes down. This is we are we are hundreds of feet from the
river here. Um we're not like adjacent to the bank of the river that can aggressively flood rapidly like you may see in some of the flooding videos you see from down south. So that's that's what we have here. And so we've provided and and and the regulations do require that we provide flood storage capacity
that is not restricted by movement towards and away from the river and the flooding and everything else. And that's what we've done here by creating this nice uniform area of kind of making us making a more shaped island that actually allows for better uniform flood plane than the current flood plane which
includes if you see on the left side screen here that little pink um these little pink nubs. That's a very constricted flood plane location actually, but now it's actually opened up to this whole corner here. So you actually have a lot better flow path actually to this area of the flood plane
because of the compensator storage. >> Do you sell cars for a living? Hey, you're putting an obstruction in the flood zone. You're saying it's going to be better. I'm not buying it. >> Well, let me let me just clarify for
myself. Um, as I see this plan, you are shaving off about 6 in in the blue areas and you're moving that to the where the house footprint would be. >> Yep. >> Is that a fair statement?
>> That's a that's a that's a good sum. Maybe a little more, a little less, but yes, that's a general guess. >> Well, I mean the flood plane is 70 and a half. Is it >> 73 73.5? 73 and a half. So that's 73
feet 6 in. Yes. >> Yes. >> All right. You're lowering let's say to the left of the house uh 73 is a little ways out. So you're you're cutting that area down to
73. >> Uh 73. Um it it it it's so on and so let me just if you >> Well, on either side. >> Yeah, it we're Yeah, we're cutting it down to 73 and then 73.5 on the limit. So you can see right here, this is actually the new 73 contour, right? This black line right here.
>> Yeah. >> So this contour right that contour that's right here, this dark line is being pulled back to here. >> Okay. to provide that balancing flood that that balance that nice even sloped flood plane across this and then up to
the 73.5. >> So, you know, I don't see this as a massive change in contour. It it's >> it's very small actually. >> I mean, there are a lot of houses in Norton that
get surrounded by water when when we have a bad flood. So, I'm not saying this is ideal by any means, but I'm not sure that it's really uh such remarkable change. I I mean, I
just don't see it that way. I honestly have never seen an applicant come in and modify the grades and bring the grades up a foot and then basically say that we're going to put a house on the area that we're filling. I've never seen it happen.
>> I agree with you, John, that >> because if that was the case, >> we are now >> why why if that was the case and that was the way that the act was set up to do this, why is everybody else not doing the same thing? I guess that's my question that that >> So that's a good question. There's some
some lots that are very difficult because so this lot has area outside the flood plane that can be unique. There's a lot of lots that are completely in the flood plane, right? And so it's almost impossible to build on that lot because you're the whole lot's in the flood plane and you can't provide compensatory storage if you don't have areas that are
outside the flood plane. That's one that's one unique thing and that's and that's what that's one challenge that we've seen. We've had come people come in and they're like if if your whole lot is in the flood plane, it's extremely difficult to to do that. Um, again, we have had lots that are new development
that we filled the flood plane to actually put the building. We we had a house where we actually put half of it on this on a slab. Half it was on stilts. The garage was on a slab so we could drive in and then the rest of the house went on stilts because we couldn't compens we didn't have enough
compensatory storage to get to fill to have the house in the flood plane. So, we actually put on stilts so the flood plane could go underneath the house. >> Um, that was in Bill Rea. um and that house has been built. Um, so that was um a unique circumstance where we we we we
moved the flood plane to get the slab the garage all out of the flood plane and then put a building over the rest of >> I mean I've seen projects where applicants building in the flood plane take all the necessary flood kind of regulations into consideration do
everything from flood vents and everything like that and you know go through the whole nine yards with the project dimensions and everything and do the compensatory flood storage as an offset, but I've never seen anybody come in to try to get outside the flood plane
and raise the whole entire existing um project site outside the flood plane and then say we're no longer in the flood plane, but we originally were. So, it it seems like an odd way about going to do this. It's it's it's a better way because it's better to have the structure outside the flood plane to
propose in the fluctu and and everything else. And that's what FE FEMA doesn't like using flood vents. They don't want the flood plan. They'd rather see let's keep everything outside the flood plane that's that's providing the flood storage is it. So that that's kind of where we've landed on this project. Why we didn't because we originally had this house in the flood
plane and I mean that was just I mean it just doesn't make sense to keep it in the flood plane when we can actually bring it out of the flood plane and provide significant competitor storage. We're we're benefiting the flood plane here by this project. We're adding a thousand cubic feet of volume to the flood plane, which means there's
reduction of flooding elsewhere because of this project. >> Well, Thomas, what did the um I'm going to defer to the building inspector FEMA on this one. >> Yeah. >> So, what did what did they ask for? >> They asked So, they asked um
the applicant to obtain a a letter of map uh revision. >> Yeah. and that uh any additional fail require compensatory flood storage which we know of and that um you know I guess
that that's really it. I had some email correspondence that I was going to send over the commission from them but I forgot to do so. Um >> but I can definitely get some background. I mean obviously I think you might have that correspondence as well which Ed probably has shared with you.
I've I've filed I've filed those requests and those are filed after we know how we're going to grade the project out because we have to show FEMA that it's it's a it's a matter it's a letter of map request change. You're requesting to change the flood plane to
a different location. You have to have data. You have to have a plan that actually shows that and works. And um and on top of that to build to build the house as we want to we want to prove to FEMA that it's outside the flood plane. And so we want to prove that the flood plane will be moved outside that. Again,
it's a separate regulatory chain, but that's our intention. >> Can I ask a question? >> Yeah. >> Is there any concern with the compensatory storage or flooding and affecting the roadway? >> No. The roadway is well above the flood
plane at elevation 75 here. 74.8 and then down here >> flood overflowing and going offsite. >> No, because again we're adding more volume. So you think about it, it it we're we're adding a we're adding we're we're taking one dump truck of material and putting it here and we're taking out
two dump trucks loads of material here and here and actually making more land. We're Yeah. So we're actually we're creating um we're taking the hillside and pulling it back to add more lowlands. That's what's happening here and in here. >> So, I guess to paraphrase this, and this
is just to me to basically simplify it, is that for this project, the intent is to create a buildable pad that you could potentially put a house on outside the flood plane, but also provide compensatory flood storage as part of
the project to mitigate for the fill that you're putting in that area. Does that seem like a good >> in a nutshell? Yes. That's exactly what we're doing. >> Okay. >> And that and again that's what the regulations talked about talk about in in 1057 for BLS. >> And John, I think u the fact that you
haven't seen this kind of thing commonly means that Norton is approaching buildout. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> And we're seeing non ideal spots being used for putting a house on.
>> You mean the outside the box kind of thinking like this? Yes. I >> Well, outside the box into the flood plane into the swamp. >> The edge of the swamp. Yes. In the old days, >> a lot of houses were built that way. >> And and D did issue a file number for this project and there was alteration
and proposed replacement. Did you send Did you send the revisions to D with this design? >> No, you don't. >> Oh, okay. You're going to have to do that. >> We don't have to, but I can. >> Yeah. >> But you don't have to, but you should. >> No, I I think I I'm fine with sending
them cuz I I I have no problem being I'm very comfortable with it. >> Any changes or modifications that should go to them, especially plans. That way they have the most recent information if it if it for instance we would deny this project or approve it and they would appeal any decision that
we made. They'd have to have the necessary information. All right. So any more questions from the commission members? Uh and anyone in the meeting has questions about this project?
>> I I have a question. >> Uh yeah just identify yourself please. Yeah, I live in 76 M Street. I I live in Northern and I'm architect. >> Yeah. And I come here to, you know, to
participate what's going on about, you know, the project. So to learn something. >> Okay. >> Yeah. My question is do you need to purchase the new soil or is is any uh recommendation for the purchase soil to
fill in you you want to raise up the >> the buildable area for one foot right >> where where is the soil come coming from >> um I mean they they may use some of the soil from the actual cut and fill so most likely in this situation here they
would regrade and make the convent storage areas first and take that material and likely use it to actually create the area around the house. That's probably what they would do structurally. Um underneath the house itself, they would use structural fill which would be taken
from likely a gravel pit somewhere um in trucking. Um so that's usually that depend it depends on the nature of the soils. Um I'm not fully familiar with the soils, but they're called out to be um gra uh mummy sand with 15% to 5%
gravel. So um not the greatest structural material, but definitely workable for around the perimeter. So that's what they would do for the soils there. So >> but what you're saying is that there's going to be net removal of soil from that site >> from within the flood plane. Yes. I I'm
not going to say from the site itself. I I my my my my I I was I was focusing on the flood plane itself which is again there's a net removal of material inside um the flood plane to create these areas. >> I see. Yeah. So you actually may be building >> we may we may be build we're building up
we we're building up here for the stepping and stuff like that but we're lowering the areas inside the flood plane again and again that's the the goal of credit storage is that every foot of interval you have they the DP wants a no net increase in fill. So that way the lateral spread of f of footpoint
at the 90year and the 100redyear storm it's always it's going to be either the same or better or or smaller in terms of how high it actually gets because of compensatory storage projects like this one. >> Yeah. >> So just just to throw a number out there how much fill are we proposing in the
flood plane? >> So um that's a good question. So, we are proposing 2,267 uh 268 square ft of cubic sorry cub of 200 2268
cubic feet of flood plane fill. >> And how much are we restoring? >> 3,617 cubic feet. That's a net of over a thousand cubic feet. >> Yeah. >> So, it's not it's not we're not even we're not even we're not even close. that if you look at the uh the intervals
as well in terms of the plan here, you've got 2475 to 4590 and then here to here. So there's a there's a the greatest flood plane benefit is is below elevation 73 actually and there's but there's also still a benefit from 73 to
73.5. So we did we balanced it elevation for elevation and also provided the best lower down which is better because that means the flood plane may not reach 73.5 because of some some I mean it's it's hard again it's it's a it's a it's a
FEMA set calculation but again DP basically the the regulations say if you work with a BLSF you have to provide expenses you want to fill and provide interval calculations and that's what they allow. the regulations also the performance
standards ask you to avoid to minimize. Can you walk us through that? >> Sure. So I think I think the key thing is to look at what 310 CMR 10574 talks about for performance standards which is basically
story storage shall be provided for all flood storage volume that's lost result to proposed project within the flood plane. uh uh um when the judge said law shall increase you basically you're not allowed to increase and you're not supposed to increase the lateral extent on compensatory storage um it talks
about what it means in in terms of the uh displacement and the intervals um uh two is about making sure you don't restrict flows which I talked about um three um is about wildlife habitat um
which I mentioned before is is per DP's wildlife guidance. It's within the 10-year flood plane. Um, so there's there's a presumption of no impact to to wildlife based on the policy, but you also have to look at ways to
avoid and minimize intrusion into the flood zone. So, did we look at a smaller house? Do we look at a smaller yard? Do we look at minimizing the alteration? That's my question. So, um, we I mean, in terms of the the the setback here, you've got a a tight septic system that
complies as close as possible to the front setback. We're 10 and a half out of the property line. Um, there's um setbacks from the septic tank to the the structure as well. So, now you're back to here. This is the deepest portion of the flood plane. Otherwise, you're starting to um shift things left and
right and starting to fit things into little peninsula islands in the flood plane, which is um very awkward um from a layout, construction standpoint, everything else. So, this project does provide I think a very nice tight >> in terms of regulatory area.
>> Third time, would you look at reducing the house size? Would you look at reducing the impact to bordering land subject to flooding? I I'll ask one more time. So you talk about we we presented this to this commission the previous plan with the house in the flood plane and the building and and from from our
our our feedback that was not something the commission wanted. So we've come back with a plan that shows the house outside the flood plane um and provides a compensatory storage and so we do believe it it meets the performance standards of 310 CMR 10574. >> Yeah, thanks for answering that
question. Thank you. So, I don't know. Looks like somebody has their hand up. >> Yeah. Yeah. I um >> All right. I guess we can go to Mark D. >> Go ahead. >> Hi, Commissioner. Mark Dib with uh PMP.
Um but I just wanted to bring up um you might re remember my face. I've worked spent a lot of years in Norton doing permitting. Uh, I just wanted to for your for the commission's information, I just wanted to mention that the one of
the large buildings just up the street that has Wayfair in it um was approved in a similar process to this and you should have a treasure trove of information uh in the file for that building regarding um a peerreview for
that building. uh a D uh supersing order of conditions approving that building. Um and it has it was permitted similarly um providing compensatory storage cuz there was existing upland. Um just so
for your benefit um there is information in that file that you could review. Um this has been done before in Norton. Um I'm not really commenting on this project. I just wanted to let the commission know that there is a bunch of
information regarding this type of proposal uh for a similar type of site for your benefit. You could review that project um just to just to get some extra uh insight on this type of project. Uh again, a very thorough peer
review by Morelene Whitten. Um D got involved um and um you know, it's a similar project. That's all I have and I'll see you in a little bit. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Very good. Um,
so I guess my question to the commission is Thank you, Mark, by the way. That's very appreciative of you. Um, I guess my question that I would propose to the commission is I mean, if that is the case, I'm not saying like cuz cuz I haven't experienced something like this
doesn't mean that it's not permittable. I want to basically put it out there. I just don't have the knowledge or expertise surrounding this kind of I guess way of permitting. So I would like to kind of look at the archives that we
have for that project that was just referred to us for Wayfair and make sure that you know it is something that D would not be in question of. Um, and obviously I would ask and propose to the
to the applicant or their consultant who's here this evening is that if they be willing to um request a continuence to the next meeting so that way I can provide the commission, you know, enough information and support uh that this project is a permittable project and
it's something that we can definitely um, you know, be confident in and it would wouldn't go to any sort of appeal process if that was the case. I just throwing it out there. >> Would you be >> I I'm amend I'm amendable to that. I think it's a great opportunity for the
question to educate. I I just I know the applicant is antsy to get this thing moving along. So, um I will I we will be vendable to >> so we wouldn't be able to issue any decision or order of conditions this evening anyway. Y. >> So, in advance of that, since it's going
to be a month away, I will also work on drafting up order conditions in anticipation of us closing and issuing a potential determination that even >> and I'd be glad to provide John with um some additional NOIs that we've submitted with approved plans and orders
of conditions that show similar conditions of what's here. >> Anything that D has provided for >> I'll I'll gladly give you the D numbers because you'll see the D numbers that they review the project. So, >> yep. And and I had one that that even was peer reviewed by R. Allen. So, it
it's um Yeah. So, if you I'm glad to glad to show you that. >> All right. Uh unless there's further comment or question, uh we can entertain a motion to continue this hearing until November 10th.
>> So, moved. >> Second. Uh, I think Courtney got the second. So, motion by Dan, second by Courtney, Dan and Lisa. How do you vote? >> I >> I >> Mark and Courtney.
>> I, >> and I'll throw in an I. The motion carries. Uh, so, thank you. >> Thank you so much. Appreciate it. You're back. Um, so next on the agenda is zero John Scott Boulevard file number 250- 11
by7. Do we ever have a representative of the >> uh Yes. Hi. My name's uh Bill Gwalt. I do I I do you have a plan that you can show? I I >> Yeah, we're we're doing that. And um
so you can just summarize the project. This is >> Yeah, sure. Uh this is a single family house we brought in a couple weeks ago. It's on John Scott Boulevard at the corner of Harvey Street. It's a lot right in front of the water department is the abiding neighbor in the back. And it's kind of an odd shaped lot as you
can see. It was created whenever they put John Scott in they cut a piece of property uh cut through it. So this is what was left on on uh our side of the property. Uh it's about uh 1.8 acres, I believe. And uh there's probably only 9,800
square ft upland. So, we can pretty much get everything we need in the upland except the well is into the 25 ft buffer. It's about uh 22 to 23 ft off the wetland flags. We looked at it a
couple weeks ago. We had a couple questions and somebody brought it up and yes, there is about a 24 in oak diameter oak pretty much it it's on the 25 ft line right where the well is. So that will have to be removed. Um access to
the well is just uh other than that 25 ft uh uh 25 excuse me 24 in diameter oak is just some saplings. Um, uh, we we I talked to a couple well guys. They need a little sedimentation pit for for their when
they pump out the wells. So, it's kind of hard to see on the plan there, but he said about a 4x4 pit. We'll wrap some couple rows of silk sock around it. I suggest you put a little stone in the bottom just to to to for stuff to settle out. Uh, the other thing was was a house
size previously. So, I reduced the house size to I believe it was a 36t long house before. Now it's down to uh 32. It's probably about 7 ft out over the wetlands. It's probably about 31 32 ft off the wetland. So there is a uh some
room there out of the 25 ft zone. And um added a couple of uh shallow dry wells for the roof runoff. Uh two two 500 foot two 500galon dry wells uh towards the other end of the property. and uh all
all the roof leaders front one in the front one in the back and the roof leaders will will uh head into them. Uh since we talked glass my understanding is the septic system as you see it there has been uh approved by the board of health. Um it had you know it meets all
the minimum setbacks for it. There's no other way to put it quite honestly if we didn't if we didn't would you require to be 100 foot off the the septic system and 100 foot off the reserve which I I have my opinions on that but in any case
to get 100 foot off the future reserve area. Uh that's why the well has to be into the into the uh couple feet into the uh 25 ft no touch zone. So >> all right you ready for questions then? Well, sure. We'll give it a try.
>> All right. Uh, commission members, questions. >> Did we lose Lisa or is she still there? >> She's still here. >> I don't think she can talk. >> Um, I don't know. Does any members have questions? Cuz I was just going to go
over some stuff. >> Uh, yeah. I think >> there's nothing you can do to avoid removing that oak tree. It's if it's the only larger tree on the property. >> Well, no, I maybe I misspoke it. It's
not the only large It's just for for a well truck to get there. There there's some larger trees up near the house. Absolutely. But um for a well truck to access that point uh he he can get there without taking any trees down. But when
the when in the house area there's some there's some trees that will will have to come down. Not so there's a couple bigger trees that are not in the house footprint but they quite honestly they probably whe they come down now or later will have to come down because they are somewhat of a some pretty good sized
pines. In my memory, I think one pine is with all the splits on it is probably about a 48 in diameter at the at the base. It splits three or four different ways. So that's kind of a danger once once your house is in place actually. But
>> uh is the well placement kind of dictated by the distance from the septic system? >> Yeah, it's a couple things. Distance from the septic system and there's a board of health has a requirement. I think he gave us a waiver on 10 ft off the property line, but I I believe that
they they required it 20 ft. So, um if I went any close to the prop any closer to the property line, it might make it to the 25 ft buffer, but then you then you're close to the property line. And also that that tree has to come down irregardless uh to get the well there.
And I can't I can't fit the well anywhere else. Um, you know, anywhere else would be closer to the into the 25 ft buff in my opinion. >> Okay. Um, >> so what happens in the sideyard once
this house is built? Somebody's going to eventually touch the no touch zone, correct? Cuz that's the only piece of yard. >> Well, there's some land in the back, but I mean, let's be honest, that would happen in in any property. I mean, yeah. Um, they you know, if you look at this
lot, it shows a 20 20 feet off the street line, but I don't know how familiar. John Scott is a 80ft layout. So, it's actually 50 ft off the edge of the pavement. Um, >> so were we going to call up for
anything? I well that was that was part of the question that I was going to propose to the commission once they revised their plan was given the site dimensions of this lot you know I think it's important to advocate of the sensitivity of the nearby wetlands um
because they're very limited with yard space and unfortunately that's just what the house allows for or the lot allows for at this location. So, you know, obviously there are some sensitivity areas to take into consideration. Majority of this small triangular
section is almost the whole entire property. Um, you know, besides the front that's closest to John Scott Boulevard, but I think it's important to either have a visual barrier in place, um, you know, along the 25- ft no touch
um, you know, area um, and that should span the whole entire area, even the well. And then there's another area near the septic field that has, you know, obviously some wetlands that are close in close proximity as well. So, you know, my suggestion would be yes, we are
going to potentially want and request that we have some sort of visual barrier installed um if the commission were to approve this project and issue an order of conditions. >> You know, that's fine. In the in the past, John, I think uh maybe Norton,
other towns, they'd have a post and rail fence. Another I think you've been out there, John. I'm not sure. But when they when they when they built John Scott Boulevard, they pushed up there's quite a few boulders that have been pushed onto the property. >> I I it might be it might be to to line
that 25 ft line with with the B boulders. I don't know if >> Yeah, we might be able to interdisperse some some posts with placards and some boulders as well. Um, you know, obviously I'm not going to, um, you know, say that you're we're going to
demand that you put a split and rail fence here, but, you know, I think it's something needs to be established along that that area. And, you know, I'll leave it up to you and your client to discuss what it is you guys are willing to potentially, you know,
um, put there as part of this. But, you know, one of the biggest things that we want to see before we start our pre-construction meeting is a site plan of you showing what is going to go in those areas that we've identified. >> Okay. >> So, >> so, so we're talk I don't mean inter.
So, we're talking the 25 ft zone there and then something over over where the um where the septic area is. >> Yes. Yes. >> Okay. Okay. I I I think that's I can I can do something for that for sure.
>> Okay. And whatever works, you know, for you and obviously I just need to pitch it back to the commission, make sure they're amendable to it and um you know, then I'll I'll you basically go for the project after that. >> Okay. I'll I'll put something together.
I know. >> And I do I do appreciate that you did uh provide us some more detail on the the well uh and also that you looked at um you know retrofitting the the location of the house and getting it away from the 25 ft no touch to give you kind of a
little bit more breathing room for construction purposes but also for um egress once the uh the house is built. >> Oh yeah, absolutely. I mean things look different on paper with lines and stuff than within me. I know. I see it on a day-to-day
basis. >> I I I understand and and I talked to a couple weld guys and this is what they told me they would need for their um little sump pump to pump the water in. So, >> I mean sizewise. So, but I added the little I think put a little stone on the bottom and and would just help keep the
um the whatever the silt the the muck or something that comes out of the weld occasionally, you know, the rock dust or whatever you want to call it. >> Yeah. And Go ahead, Lisa. Sorry. Are you intending to construct it this fall? This winter? >> Well, I think you'd like to put at least
put the well in this winter. Yes. >> Okay. So, what I'm seeing is how are they going to access that well? Because I would ask that if they're wouldn't just do the well and not do the house to keep the clearing to a minimum. >> Yes. And and and you know, I was out
there last one day last week. I can't remember, but I was standing at the well. It's it's all it's it's kind of like it's all pine needle covered up on the top body, but other than that that I know they show you that main tree. There are a few other trees up in the uh kind
of but a truck can fit cuz I looked at right from joint Scott straight back into there and there's some small saplings when I say inch inch and a half at the most. And uh those would have to be uh really they could be cut down by hand. They might have to do a little
grading with the machine to make sure that the the the truck doesn't get stuck or wait until it gets a little colder to get back in there. But um >> So can they avoid the 25 ft to access? >> Yeah, I'm sorry. Yes. Yes, they can. They can avoid the 25 ft. They would just come at an angle.
>> Uh maybe across kind of where the house may be kind of the middle of the house where the proposed house is. Yes. Yes. >> Okay. So Joel, I think we just need to condition that. >> Yeah, we would definitely condition. Obviously, they'd provide us a sequence of what they would intend to do for this. That was kind of discussed at the
last meeting, like when they would do um the construction aspect and how they would use uh storage material on site and storage stockpiles. So, that was discussed. Um we're also going to probably ask them as part of this is how they're going to basically gain entry to the well and then also how they're going
to button that area up afterwards. >> Okay. >> Yeah. and maybe stay down the 25 ft for the winter. >> Yeah, that would be that that would be ideal obviously before they would do this is to >> physically demarcate the 25 ft so we can
see it. >> Yeah, that's that's shouldn't be a problem at all. >> Okay, thank you. >> Um so do we have any questions from anyone
in the meeting um about this project? And if not, um, this will be a continuation with the idea that we might be able to wrap it up. >> Yes. The reason why we would need to continue this is because
um, it's going to be more than 21 days >> to our next meeting. >> Oh, yes, that's true. >> So, okay, >> that was another thing I forgot to tell Mr. Arnold as well. >> All right. So unless there are further questions, I think we consider a motion
to continue this hearing until uh November 10th. >> So I'll move >> second. Uh we have a motion by Dan, seconded by Mark. Uh so
well starting with Courtney and Dan, how you vote? I >> I >> and Lisa and Mark, >> I have to abstain because I didn't get to review the file for signing. So,
>> all right. >> I >> and I'll throw in an I. So, the motion carries. So um is there well it's continued until the 10th and u uh you can go over with John
as to whether you have to attend the next uh meeting. >> Yeah, I'll I'll put together that I'll get it to you John in enough time before the meeting and Bill I'll I'll draft up a a draft order conditions as well. >> All right. I appreciate that John.
>> All right. So on the agenda, the next three hearings have been already continued. So that brings us to uh the Abrew Lane uh project, although it's pronounced I guess differently. Abrao
>> Abrao uh or uh it does it doesn't have a file number now. >> Um I did not see one. I >> checked this afternoon. I didn't have one. Megan, can you stop sharing? >> Oh, I'm sorry. Uh so we I presume have a representative
of the project. Could that be you Mark? >> Yes. Uh good evening Mark Dib with um PMP Engineering um representing the applicant Maurice Legacy Real Estate for the subdivision plan called Abrau. I'm
in the same boat as you with uh pronouncing it lane in North. Um, we filed a notice of intent for the proposed work related to the subdivision roadway which includes the required drainage system to support new road. Uh, with your permission, I'd like to share
my screen. >> You should have sharing capabilities. >> Okay. Um, The project tonight is um a parcel off of Elm Street to the west of Elm Street. Uh it is a
single family home parcel that consists of 7.42 acres. Um the resource areas on the site. So Elm Street is on this side of the page. The property is to the west. Um
the resource areas on the site consist of a BVW uh the northeast kind of area of the property. Um on our plans the green represents the BVW, red represents a no touch zone and the cyan represents
100t buffer. So there's the buffer zone and BVW. Um there is also a wetland across the street that creates a buffer zone on the parcel as well. Uh and then the remaining 7 acre lot has a uh a
wetland off to the west side of the property and again the same buffer zones are shown. Um the existing lot does have a single family home, a paved driveway and some paths throughout um the shed,
some fences, uh some stone walls. Going to go to the proposed roadway layout. So the proposal is to uh subdivide this. This is part of a uh which will eventually be a subdivision application
uh with the planning planning board uh to subdivide the 7 acre parcels into three parcels that will have the minimum at least the minimum lot area of 80,000 square ft and the appropriate zoning
shape factors and uh zoning related criteria will be met for for the lots. uh a new roadway will be is proposed. That roadway will um have some drainage
uh components to it. There is a bio retention area cited in this part of the project which as you can see goes um within about the 100 to 80 ft buffer to the wetland across the street. Um there
is also there will be some work to uh demo the existing house in this area um which will be within the jurisdictional buffer to the to the wetland as well. And then there's uh the culde-sac which
is in the back the lot. There is additional drainage for the remainder of the roadway as well as um I will show you a buildout plan which is a conceptual plan uh that the drainage has been based on to size the drainage
structures and um drainage components. The this is all part of a plan set. This again is the drainage areas. Um for the subdivision, we're required to to provide uh a plan
and profile. Um and then this is a conceptual buildout layout of the project. It shows uh the three um duplex houses being proposed. As you can
see, this lot will have some work within the buffer zone to this to the BBW. However, the entirety of lots two and three are outside jurisdictional areas. Um so we've provided the drainage that
is provided is designed um includes the impervious areas and different site uh characteristics uh grass lawn woods um that would be that would go along with this proposed development.
Um the remaining uh sheets in the set and uh details uh the cross-section and standard uh subdivision type details as well as uh the straw water erosion control temporary um erosion control
measures that will take place out in Elm Street uh silt sacks um at the existing catch basins in Elm Street and um items items such as that are in the construction details. Uh we
do believe it meets uh D um regulations and um believe it is worthy of a notice of intent. However, uh that is my presentation and be happy to answer any questions you might have.
[Music] >> Does this could we see the first diagram that you put up? the one that had the larger picture of both Elm Street and Reservoir uh street.
>> It's just water. >> Well, that's one of the questions I wanted to ask. Yeah. So, it's at your discretion. Uh maybe if you could enlarge that a little bit. >> Still not seeing anything. >> So just to kind of give everyone a idea
what address this is at. >> 76 >> 76 >> Elm Street. >> Okay. >> But it it it abuts uh multiple properties on Reservoir Street. Is that what you're >> That is correct. That is correct. The back portion or the rear portion of the
property does abut reservoir parcels. >> Now, >> did it come through there yet, Dan, for you? Oh. Uh, well, what I was going to say is that, uh, I believe not far from there,
uh, we had some people who were complaining that the the water was too high, uh, some somewhere on Reservoir Street. Now, maybe it was a little bit south of of uh
where that of the locust there, but >> I think it was across the street where the BDW is connected by a swale or pipe under Elm Street. It was the house across the street. Mark,
>> that was during the ENRAD process. Right. >> I'm sorry. That was during the ANRAD process. >> Not sure. Don't remember. >> It was abundant. >> Uh, all right. >> So, Mark, maybe you want to address any
runoff. Actually, if you put that plan up because I'm going to ask you a question about that in a minute. The grading plan. Maybe you want to address some of the storm water, how it's going to be captured. I think her concern was that I think she was across the street and it was she has
a BBW I think in her front yard. I think that's part of the problem on her sideyard. >> That's why it's wet. >> That's why it's wet. >> So, um there there is a number of test pits that were were done. They they are in the um
in the detail area of the plans. Um there this the up into the high point right here of the room. >> You got to show your screen. >> Sorry. >> Oh, sorry. >> It's all right. >> Most of the way there. I just didn't hit
the share button. >> Sorry about that. >> Okay. So um from the high point of the road, this segment of the road is draining uh sheet flowing off into a bio retention
area um that uh will manage that runoff for the property um for that roadway. We again there's uh test pits um groundwater
um is not far below the bottom of these things but it does meet storm water management standards. It's at least these are at least a couple 2 feet um to to groundwater and um the remaining area
just gets sent to the rear of the site you know down here. Um you know other than managing it through a uh infiltrating bio retention area that is um essentially the extent of the runoff
or uh stormwater management control for that first portion of the of the street. >> So >> is that what you were referring to, Dan? >> Sorry. >> Is that what you were referring to?
Uh, I think it Well, actually, I I was maybe the houses I thought of weren't quite that clo uh close upon further uh reflection,
the ones on Reservoir Street. Um but but uh with regard to Mark that this drainage direction reflects the current pattern on
>> uh currently currently the existing site does drain um down the existing driveway with no storm water management. Uh you can see that the 106 contour 104 103 102 uh you know so the existing single
family home driveway would would drain out into Elm. So um the storm owner management report we provided uh should does show a reduction of of runoff to what we I think we call drain point one
which is out at the this property limit. And you you have a um something illustrated running alongside the driveway that is kind of checkered or whatever. Uh is is that intended? Well,
no. I I uh Yeah, that that where you're what does that denote? >> That is a sidewalk. >> Oh, okay. So there's no there's no uh structure that would accept the sheet
runoff from the from the driveway. It just goes down into is a catch basin structure or >> there is um a gravel strip uh right here signify from here down to here that does
some filtering before it hits the the bio retention area. Um but you know and before that there's a um a Cape Cod BM or curbing it don't off the top of my head but uh so you know it'll it'll
channelize and then sheet flow off uh once it gets down to the basement. So, is there a uh a culvert underneath Elm Street in that region or is it it would be
Yeah. So, there's some existing culverts and catch basins. um over here that sounds like the potentially the person that was commenting earlier might I I don't I don't I'm not familiar with it but I
don't maybe this wetland here might might have some water issues um associated and I don't know if this if these these uh catch basins ever flood in the road um but our goal is to not let any runoff out into the road. So
technically I think we technically should be helping um that situation regarding runoff uh by reducing runoff that would otherwise go to Elm Street off the existing driveway. >> So the bio retention area
is that where does that discharge to? that is handling the runoff to um I just I'd like to get both this plan and my detail plans up. I don't think
that's going to happen. But um that is believe there's a uh a level spreader for that manages runoff. Um at there
will be a certain point where it will um overflow the levels of water into a rip wrap area um and will go on its way but it'll be a reduced rate from which uh previously ran down the driveway. Um and
that's all documented in the storm water management report. So it it basically goes along Elm Street for a short distance into the into a couple of catch basins there or >> Yes. Okay. >> Yes. After it's been uh treated um and
discharged at a lesser rate as required by the storm water management standards. >> All right. Anybody else have any questions about that? >> Yeah, I I have a few questions. So John, are we having this peer reviewed? Well, that was the question that I was going
to ask the commission because this obviously doesn't trigger the state's requirement for storm water management report, but it does trigger the need for a local um review. So I guess that would what I propose to the commission is
>> are would they feel more comfortable you know having this peer-reviewed by an outside source cons uh engineer consultant uh to ensure that the storm water's compliant with our local bylaw um proceedings and rigs
>> I would just vote um okay next question so there's no catch basins in the It's just going to be sheet flow to the bio retention for for that portion of it. >> Correct. >> Okay. That's what's concerning to me. Um
in that you know how much of it's really going to be caught by the bio retention. That's why I really want a peer review on this. So across the street you're showing uh straw waddles or something over there. What is that proposed erosion
control check for? that is um just a extra measure. Um there will be uh what this right here this is a temporary construction entrance and both the
existing and proposed grades have runoff going towards the street. So, we're proposing two extra um offsite erosion control methods, the the silt sacks in the existing catch basin, as well as protecting
um this uh wetland with uh an extra. >> Here's the problem we have with that. You're actually letting it go and you're going to capture it at the end. You need to keep it on your property. So whether
you use that bio retention during construction is what I would suggest and diverting it into there and then reestablishing that with the correct soil for infiltration after the fact. You can't just let sheet flow off your site, especially construction. Go across
the street and treat it across the street. Can't do that. That's it's you have to put source reduction on your own property. So, >> okay, >> you need to take that proposed check day off because what you're saying is we're just going to let it fly across the
street and that's not acceptable. Um, so I'd like you to re review the plan, take that off, come up with um as part of your erosion sediment control plan, a temporary um trap in that location to manage runoff during construction.
Um, and then can we look at existing the existing house in the duplex grading that's going to that the proposed? Sorry. >> Okay, hang on. Um, so the one question I have here is those look like extraordinary. I mean, I
don't know the scale of this, but those look like rather long driveways. I'm just wondering why the house is that far back and if it can be closer to the street or or angled to um minimize the intrusion into the electrical buffer.
Um we can take a look at that. Um, there's no particular magic to other than whatever the front yard setback is, which I could um, it's probably on the front page could confirm the front yard
setback. And then >> they just look long compared to the other ones. And I'm like, well, that's the most important one, but >> yeah. Um, they look about the same. But anyways, um you know, if if there's room given
front yard setbacks, uh sighting, we obviously want the septic system up there or somewhere outside the 100t buffer. >> Y >> um I can uh give you that answer. >> Okay. Or maybe just reorient it just,
you know, to the I don't know what direction that is, but northwest up the page. Doesn't have to be 90° to the street, right? to try to maybe just give a little more room back there. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> And there's no floods up. There's no
floods at once, remember? Okay. Um, other questions from members of the commission and questions from anyone in the meeting. >> Yeah, I have a question. >> All right. U, so we have a question from
a member here from a uh an attendee here in the room. So just identify yourself and go ahead. >> My name is Sunny. I live in the 76. >> Okay. >> Okay. So I'm wondering
the width of the the apple length is enough for you to to make the project frontage. >> No, the width of the apple length
>> a he's talking about the width of the bra lane whether it's big enough. >> Big enough. >> That's a subdivision standard, right? planning board standard >> and also uh the there are two two uh house there
I think there are two different 73 and 75 I'm no 72 and 74 above in the aru land and between there green area and the tree okay I think
that they should have some certain setback by the zoning And also >> all your questions are zoning related as of right now. >> Yeah. >> So we don't have jurisdiction. The commission doesn't have jurisdiction over zoning and zoning bylaws.
>> So any of those questions that you have regarding this project would be positioned to the the planning board. >> Um now Mark, have you guys submitted anything to the planning board as of yet? >> I do not believe uh planning board
submitt has happened yet. >> Okay. Um, there are other people from PMP that could confirm that, but I do not believe so. >> Okay. So, for instance, what I'm asking for is that this this gentleman here that's asking questions regarding um zoning and planning board questions, he
should probably address those at the meeting um when you submit an application. So, you would get another notification about a planning board meeting >> and you would want to address your questions and concerns at that meeting. I think they should know the zoning.
They should know that. >> Yeah. Well, they they they should. Yes. Any any applicant that's coming in front should read the zoning bylaw and make sure that everything works in accordance with the zoning rules. >> Also, one more question >> about the existing
demo. I don't >> So, concerns concerns with uh common wildlife. >> Yeah. uh we don't have any sort of um I guess jurisdiction over common wildlife uh with projects. If it was within any sort of sensitive natural heritage
habitat then it would be a concern of ours but this project is not in those areas. >> Okay. >> And and just one comment about that is u fortunately the clearing is relatively
limited on this site. Uh so there still will be a fair amount of uh tree native growth >> that uh that kind of wildlife can occupy and they'll use the yards as well as
they always do. >> Any other questions from anyone in the meeting? And uh as I recall this could we we felt strongly that this needs to be peer reviewed at least.
>> I think I think uh Lisa made the recommendation that we have this peer reviewed. Um you know I can definitely get a quote for peer review and send that over to you Mark if if you and your um client want to review that. Make sure you're comfortable with the peer review.
Um also it's my understanding that this project does not have a D number yet. Um, so we would probably be leaning towards a continuence until, you know, our November 10th meeting. Um, but if we can make preparations on getting that
peer review all slated out and, you know, do that offline, I think maybe we could potentially get in a good position and I could potentially draft up a draft order provided that the peer review comes out and there's no outstanding issues or any sort of minor adjustments you can
handle within the month span that we have from now until then. >> Yeah. you know, if the commission uh desires a peer review, then we'll go through the process. >> All right.
>> And uh we can if I'll therefore request a continuence to that hearing date in November. >> All right. So, unless there are further questions or comments, I think we can consider a motion for
continuation of this hearing. until November 10th. >> So moved. >> Seconded. >> Uh we have a motion by Lisa, second by Courtney, Dan, and Lisa Addie. >> Vote.
>> Yeah, we just lost it in. >> Okay. Well, uh then uh Mark and I'll throw in an I and Courtney also. I >> I >> Okay, motion carries even without Dan.
Uh so, thank you guys. Um and we're now uh at the point reviewing orders of conditions and we can consider a vote on um the
need for peer review on this project. >> I don't think we can. We need Dan back. >> Oh, okay. Well, we we can consider these. We can't review these. >> We can review them. Um, but I don't
think Lisa can vote on this one. >> No. >> So, we need Dan back. >> Oh, one zero elm. >> Yes. I have to recuse. >> Yeah. >> Or abstain. >> Abstain. Yeah. >> Oh, zero elm. Yeah.
Okay. So, three. All right. >> You can run upstairs and try to call them. >> Um, so we can't call him drive. >> I just don't have the place. >> I am. >> Oh, you have?
>> I think so. >> Give him a hot spot. >> I think he should just come in person to these meetings. He lives like 2 minutes away. Um, >> he walks here all the time and I offer to drive him home after
these meetings cuz it's dark. >> Yeah, that's it. Hello. >> Hey, Dan. >> Oh, good. Thanks, Megan. Because I uh have my screen blank. >> Does this count? >> So, >> uh yeah, you can. So, uh Dan, uh we're
going to be reviewing the um uh the orders of conditions for uh Zero Elm Street. And you may recall that is the project on the old um uh not Eureka what was the uh
>> which was >> Reeden Barton. Reeden Barton. Yes. Uh the old Reeden Barton is a uh parking lot across the street. So, uh this is a um
>> kind of a standard um orders of conditions. There's really no uh other than than the Oh, you Yeah, there's no no um unique
uh conditions and the findings are standard. So, anyone anyone else have any questions or comments about the draft order conditions? He's on now. >> Oh, you're you're you're able to hear us
again, Dan. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Well, I'm sorry. >> Oh, not a problem. >> I will have to come to the next meeting in person. >> Uh or upgrade whatever the problem. Do you have you have a Verizon? Yes.
>> Uh yes. Yes. >> Well, I don't know if we can upgrade that problem. I have the same problem. Um, so any questions about the draft orders? Uh, if not, we can consider a motion to
accept the draft as submitted. >> So move. >> Seconded. >> We have a motion by Mark, seconded by Courtney, um, Lisa, and Dan. How do you vote? I >> and Courtney and Mark, how do you vote?
>> I >> I >> and I'll throw in an I. So that's four eyes, one abstension. And um we should probably vote on requesting peer review
for the Abrao Lane project which does not yet have a file number. I'll make a motion to require review peer review of the storm water
management report and design for a lane map 17 34-02 >> second. >> So we have a motion by Lisa seconded by Dan and Lisa and Dan. How do you vote? >> I I
>> and Courtney and Mark I >> I and I'll throw in an I. Motion carries. Uh I think that brings us to the end of our agenda and ask for other items. Consider a
motion to adjourn. Roll call vote for adjournment. Please >> make a motion to adjurnn. >> Second. Uh motion by Lisa, seconded by Mark, Lisa, and Dan. How do you vote?
>> Hi. Um Dan frozen. >> Dan looks mesmerized. Turns down. What did you look at, Dan? >> I think that's a yes for Dan. >> That shirt screams yes.
>> Okay, >> we should all chip in and get Dan a Mifi for his uh for his office. I have an extra one. We just bought two extra. We didn't need >> Okay. And so Courtney and Mark, how do you vote? >> I I And I'll throw in an I. Um I might
need one of those. What are those uh devices? >> It's an Exfinity booster. When I moved upstairs to this, I reclaimed two extra bedrooms when my daughter moved out. So, it took a while cuz the boost we we had Exfinity over blah blah blah. Well, it
wasn't wasn't anything to do with that. And uh we're two days to bring that. So I have two extended boosters. >> I I have an ERO mesh system. So I now have Wi-Fi in my barn, which is very important. >> Okay. So So Dan, how do you vote?
>> Yep. Still frozen. >> All right. So Dan is the deciding vote on the adjournment. >> All right. So >> good night everyone. >> Good night. >> Good night. Yeah.