This is the opening of the Monday, July 13th uh Norton Conservation Commission. It is now 6:31 and our initial item on the agenda is
minutes of June 22nd. Mr. Chair, I had some think uh corrections, but um it would appear that Nate isn't here. She actually she said that she has made
those corrections >> and you didn't even speak to her. [laughter] >> Well, she's awfully good. >> Yeah, >> but okay. All right. She's actually >> I'm just that good, Dad. >> She She's on a meeting. She's She's looking over your shoulder all the time. >> Oh my goodness. And here I was about to
go off on a diet tribe about Megan. >> Oh, well, you still can. I'm sure. >> I'm always listening. Big sister >> sometimes. I mean, you need a big big sister, right? >> Yeah. >> Um, all right. So, you you now have no
further additions. They're being incorporated. >> Uh, well, no. I mean, I'll just I'll I'll give these to you, Megan, or send these to you or something. >> That That would be great. >> Okay. I mean, it's just some There's one
comma missing on page one. we don't have to worry about that. And then there are some uh on page six there's some new things. So no big >> thank you Dan. >> You're welcome. All right. So
uh of the members that were here which include myself, Joe, Mark, Dan, and that's it. Um any other comments? Uh if not, we can consider a motion to
from those who were here. >> I will make that motion, Mr. Chair. >> Uh we have a motion by Dan, seconded by >> second >> Joe. [clears throat] Um so, uh
Mark, Dan, and Joe, any vote? Hi, >> I I >> I >> and I'll screw in an I and then Lisa and Courtney. I'm assuming you'll be happy with an abstension. >> Abstain. >> Abstain.
>> All right. Motion carries. Uh, next on the agenda is 181 West Main Street. And um I guess there was a meeting uh June 30th
>> there was and I'll let Mark Arnold from Goddard Consulting give his presentation. Mark you have screen sharing capabilities. So if you want to just give an oversight to the board that'd be awesome. >> Great. Um so apologies for this late submitt John. Um this vac the holiday
weekend threw everything into a rut last week. Um, so we just emailed this over to you, John. Um, so we did document as um discussed. So I let me take it back in a second. So Mark Garn with Got Consulting here on behalf of Mr. Patel for 181 West Main Street. It's the enforcement matter in regards to impact
to the riverfront area. There was a meeting uh with uh two of the members of the commission and uh Mr. Thomas on June 30th. Um during that meeting there was discussions of additional um items that needed to be addressed. One was um making sure the waddles were not staked
through but rather stakes were placed on the outside of those waddles. Um that has been completed. Um overlapping was also adjusted along with making sure that good contact with the soil was adjusted. So that was done I believe the next day and I had photographs from the contra he sent me over photos to show me
that everything was done. Um so that was great. Um so that was uh a request of the commission during the sitewalk. Uh we talked about watering. The applicant is watering the plantings every day. Um these photographs um are from this actual day of the sitewalk. Um so this
is the front area here along the street. This is the side uh southeast corner coming along the back of the property here coming to the back. Um and then back through here. You notice the ground is actually kind of moist cuz the guy actually just finished watering when these photos were taken. Um so they've been watering them about twice a day. Uh
and this wraps around to um the other side of the building on the northwest corner. So the uh so we talked about watering. The other thing we talked about was having Goddard Consulting go out on a weekly basis um and do inspections. Um
um apologies. We with the holiday weekend we missed last week. We did get out today. So I do have photographs um from today. Um so I'm just going to pull those up quickly just to show you that we have um been trying to be diligent there. So these are photographs from
today of the site. Um some uh the urban is still taking time. The seed mix takes quite a bit of time to germinate. Um we're not seeing any erosion which is good. Um so um what you can see here um you'll notice the stakes here are on the outside and we also have on the inside.
So they're wedging the the waddle together to keep it up. Um and we actually add a lot more stakes. So we didn't just pull out stakes and just kind of put them inside. We actually bought more and put them on around just to make sure the things stayed really secure. So this is the area here. We did um notice a few mortalities. We found
four or is there four? I think it was five. We found five that we're missing um today. Um so, um we do suggest that we wait till there's at least like a dozen or more before we do a buy and install just because otherwise we're just buying one at a time, which is just a lot of back and forth with the
nurseries. Um particularly if you want to get the right plants with really good strong native species from the the good suppliers. Um but this time we've only lost about four. Um so far everything else is doing well which is great considering um the heat we had the last two weeks. Um the fact that things are still showing green and not showing
brown leaves or anything like that. Um it's showing that's there. Again the germination of the herbaceous is going to take some time but there's no erosion happening this time. So we'll just keep monitoring that. We don't see any rope regrowth in the next about 2 weeks or so. We'll probably recommend reeding um
and then watering to get the seed mixed into the soil. So that way hopefully it can take. So um that's where we are at this point with the uh the monitoring there. Um the last thing um just to update the commission. So we have submitted an application to the board of
health online. Uh I did get a copy of of of that septic plan which I can show you here. This is the septic plan that was just submitted to the board of health. Um, so as previously discussed, the plan is to keep the existing septic tank
configuration out here, but replacing it with a regular tank and a pump chamber, pumping it around, and then bringing it to the front and doing it here. Um, this mounted system actually is is uh is actually nice because it means we actually have to basically remove some of the parking. So, we're actually going
to remove impervious surface when we do this septic upgrade um because it's going to be a mounted system. So, we're actually going to have um grass over this, I believe. So um that's what's currently before the board of health along with a variance request which is about um nothing to do with the septic
system. Um but at the same time it does affect the size of the septic system. So once that that septic size is determined upon um we'll actually have that um work actually fully scoped. So that is in progress with the board of health. Um but I think at this time we are planning
on putting together plans for this plan because the work area won't change. Um, and I think the commission would want to start the discussion about the the the patio in the back and the regulations behind that besides the septics. If the septic size changes a little bit, it's not going to change the scope of the
work itself. So that can if that changes during the hearing process, I think that's um that's understandable from the commission standpoint, but I know the commission wants to start the review of this process and actually have a notice of intent in front of them. So um, now these plans have been submitted to the board of health, we can actually move
forward with actually having the NOI together because we actually have a subject design. we know it's kind of the maximum size we would actually need to build on and if it gets smaller during the permitting process um I think that's going to be um an easy um change for the commission to understand during the hearing process itself. So those are the
updates uh that I have. Again, we'll be out there weekly. Uh I did forward you John the email I sent to Harry um today from what we saw and we'll just keep up with that um going forward. Uh so Mark um this is actually the first
time at least some of the commission members are aware that plantings occurred. So roughly when did those plantings get placed? >> They occurred uh between like June 24th and June 29th or the morning of June
30th. I think some of them came in got in the last we hydro seed I think the morning of the 30th. >> All right. Uh questions from other members of the commission. >> Yes. Uh Mark, could you just tell us again which were the species that uh
have uh didn't make it that died prematurely? >> Um or died as a result of the heat >> or whatever. >> I I don't I didn't get
uh did not I think we didn't grab that. I think it was we had we had we were we had a little bit of confusion as to which species died. >> Okay. >> So, um I I can confirm that next week. I think we have to look at some photographs more closely cuz I think someone needed we needed to crossverify cuz it was a little confusing as to
which shrub died. Um so I can't say which ones again. I think there's only four or five have died out of um we haveund um 106 shrubs and 39 trees. And um one thing I forgot to mention um sorry about this Mr. Chair. Um the we
did have some planting substitutions we kept within the species uh except for high bush blueberry cleur was added. Um we did add more trees because we didn't have enough of the service berry. So um our report does document that. So
there's 35 trees proposed. We had 39 trees planted. 110 shrubs proposed. We had 106 planted. So the quantities of plantings of the whole didn't change. Trees went up a little bit by four. Shrubs went down by four. Um and we um just mixed in um the fibers and the
clethra um there as well. So everything is native. Um should be well suited and healthy. Um just a little bit of supply change. >> Uh any other questions? >> So um I I do have a question. So you
mentioned that the septic system is before the board of health now. So, will you be filing a notice of 710 with us for that septic system? >> Yes. Yeah. So, my my concern was making sure that we had a septics plan that would actually show the maximum extent of work that needed to be shown. Um, and
so we do actually have that now, which is great. Um cuz I I've been concerned that submitting a plan to this board um without um having a plan that we know that the kind of the the max uh extent of work area um which is still within the parking lot area disturbed areas.
Let me just pull this plan up again just so you can see it. So this plan is before the board of health um and this is the septic system that would be the largest we would be asking for on this property. We wouldn't ask for anything larger than this. Um so >> when do you intend to construct that
system and and will that affect access to the back? >> So um so you notice when we walked the site um we did we did deliberately leave plantings out of this axis. So for two reasons. One is keeping this this normal maintenance axis on the side of the
building around um and then keeping um access to the septic tanks which are here. So, um, this work should be, uh, will allow us to get a machine around the back, um, get the septic tanks, um, installed, run the force mane around,
um, remove the asphalt in this left part of the parking lot, build the septic system, and then plant grass um, over that. >> So, this design is still under review by board of health. So, we'd have to wait for them to approve before we could install it. So, at this time, we're
planning on getting conservation filing together, which allows us to have you um in Q while board of health confirms um the footprint of the design. >> Okay. Well, one of my concerns is you mentioned potentially hydro seating again. So, how would the truck access
the back if the system's done and what's the cover going to be over the system? >> Yeah. Uh so, for a hydro seedater, um they have a hose that can spray. Um, usually it's like 50 or 100 ft from the truck. Um, so the truck doesn't need to the truck doesn't need to reach the back
to to hydro seed this area. So this this is your this is our proposed limit of work for the septic um work here. So basically it basically basically encompasses the area that wasn't planted um but only seated. So this way we can basically put the erosion controls in,
remove the area that was loaned, put these tanks in and then relo and receat back around and then over this this system here. Um, again, I'm I'm still confirming with the the the engineer, but per these plans, it's loming and seating over the septic system, which is per this note here. Um, and we're
putting a new curve off this corner here coming down to here. So, we are going to lose uh a good amount of degraded area in the riverfront area by putting the septic system uh in the front of the property. >> So, John's promised, in terms of storm water permits, are we expecting a new
storm water design in conjunction with this septic system? Yeah, I would think so. Along probably with a mass DOT permit because they're they're proposing a sidewalk it looks like down there. So, and they're on 123. So, I presume they're going all to the wall with this
one for this design. >> So, that area is going to be closed off. You're modifying the curve cut. >> We're closing a curve cut, >> right? You're modifying it. So, you'll have to go to for that. So, I guess just so you're aware that when we look at the
septic system, there should be a um permit for your storm water to be in compliance with the mass D rags. >> Understood. Um well, we can definitely submit the required paperwork for mass DP stormwater regulations. This is
redevelopment and we are decreasing we are decreasing impervious surfaces um by default, >> right? which just means that you qualify for as redevelopment, but you still have to meet the standards. >> Y
>> thank you. >> I have a couple questions. >> Sure. Go ahead, Joe. >> Uh, did we come up with an invasive species management plan? >> We did not develop an invasive species management plan. We do plan to monitor
invasive species growth within um the planted area while we're monitoring it through this. We go back to a couple of the photos there. It looked like from the photos that you took most recent looked like there was some Asian knotweed forming within the planting. Am I correct or incorrect on this?
>> Just give me one second. I just need to make sure I I I think I might have closed this road up for one second. >> Good eye, Joe. So, let's see. That'll >> be around the back side. >> Yep. Work my way around. I'm just just
cross-checking myself here. This may be some right here. >> It looks like maybe close to the steak. It looks like we got some Asian, aren't we, to see some heart-shaped leafing there closer to the steak. >> Yep. >> All right. So, I think we're going to be
expecting that you have a plan here intact for this when we go a whole lot further. Um, my other issue is on discussion as our sidewalk. We talked about the drainage in the front. I see no notation on the plan for that or what materials
were used. Yeah. So, I know the engineer uh the engineer might have but I I I I can I think I don't think the engineer communicated that. Um and the rip wrap did not get placed. That's that's one thing that we did. The landscaper did not complete. Um sorry, I forgot to
mention that. So, but the the plan was to rip wrap in this area. That's why those white flags were there. So, it was this here from this point here to here to here and back to here. And we can make sure the plan shows that. Um I agree that should be on the plan. So like this the engineer was focused on
septic design and I I um we hadn't even discussed [clears throat] storm water. >> That's understandable. But we're not here for septic design. We're here on a violation. >> Correct. >> Under understood understood. We we and and we we we we we suggested that adding
the rip wrap as a as additional precaution. That area was vegetated and we're we're reveating it now. So, but again, we'll write why the river has to be exist >> and invasive species management. When are we going to see that? Three or four more meetings or [clears throat] when are we going to pop it here?
>> I I I I under the enforcement matter, I don't think that was requested, but I can talk to the client about we could get [clears throat] developing that. I think we would want to draw out that and roll that into the um the NOI. Um, so I'd like to have that in the OI versus just under enforcement if that was going
to be the case because you want to make sure it gets managed long term. >> No, we don't want to tie that to an order of conditions and a certificate of compliance. We need to keep those separate. This is part of an enforcement order. We would not want to mix that with a notice of intent. Okay, just my two cents there. Those are
two separate completely separate issues. We need to close out the enforcement order separately when the time comes. Notice intent is separate. Just to just to be clear on this whole entire certain just so that we're speaking right facts, there is no current enforcement order on this property. Just so we're all clear,
it's a violation. So >> violation. Okay. >> So technically there is no um I guess enforcement currently on this property. Just so that we're clear. >> Right. So they're doing it as a good faith effort so that they don't get an
enforcement order. >> I would assume. >> Yeah. Uh I I uh John I I think we should you and I should talk offline about the the invasive species management because there's a few ways to deal with that and I'd like to kind of pick your brain and make sure you and I are thinking the same thing before we like put something
in writing that kind of makes sense for everybody. Um but I think we could definitely put something together that would kind of work towards you know that that thing. But it also relates to potentially like going outside like the the the disturbed area if we're going to actually manage some invasives. So maybe
we can talk offline about that. That's that's something we can talk about right now actually. I mean cuz technically I mean a lot of this disturbance and everything is going to be within the 25 ft no disturbance zone, right? Or maybe some of it is going to be within the 25 ft no disturbance zone. It's going to be
within riverfront area. There's a lot of stipulations and regulations when it comes with managing species within those sensitive areas. So therefore, I know that the commission has voiced the concerns with putting it in a notice of intent, but if we do document it in a notice of intent, there's ways that we
can condition it appropriately and permit it. That way, for instance, the applicant actually do it with certain whether manual har manual removal or chemical treatments, whatever the whatever the um quant quantity and established growth um you know really is
out there. I don't know because we haven't done a quantity assessment of what's actually out there. Looks like there's Japanese knotwheat dense dense stands in it. I think that's definitely something that's going to have to come in for a permit because [cough and clears throat] I think that goes all the way back to the river if I'm not mistaken. So, those are some
things I think that, you know, Mark, you and your team need to really take a look at, talk to your client, basically look at it and kind of get a better understanding as to what the next steps would be for, you know, assessing and and evaluating the the um, you know, the community growth potential and the
impacts it would have on this mitigation area. >> Yeah. And I and I think we need to do more mapping because I also think Japanese is growing off site on the neighbor's property, which is very close to us. So, um, that may also cause that that's also a problem for us is we we
can manage the basis on our property. We can't manage it on neighboring property. >> Correct. You're only you're only physically and legally responsible for your property, unfortunately. >> So, I'm John, we're glad to to work on that. Um, >> yeah, I think I think that's probably
the best tactic moving forward. If you ask for my my guidance and my professional opinion, I think that's the only way where you can really narrow it down and really quantify and basically lay out a really good management plan and management strate strategy that's going to be effective.
>> All right. So at this point um we will be expecting the notice of intent and um and the how successful the plantings are and so we don't need a a motion. This
wasformational. Is that correct? >> Yeah. There's no motion on the table this time. >> All right. So unless there are further questions, um I think we can move to our next item. >> Thank you.
>> All right. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Uh and the next item is 292 West Main Street. And Chris, it looks like you're on deck for that. Is that correct? >> Yes, sir. Uh for the record, my name is
Chris Bradell. a wetland scientist with Goddard Consulting. Um, and since the last meeting, we've been going through the exercise of really trying to parse through the, you know, records that are available to us, primarily historic
aerials, and um, kind of establishing a a history of the site, what's gone on over time on the site, and kind of what we have to work with as as a baseline of conditions. So last week we did um submit a document to that effect to you
which I figured uh is kind of a um it's kind of a presentation in of itself. So I figured I would kind of walk through this as though it's you know a thought process with the commission as we go back uh you know before any
relevant regulations. Here we have 1961. We can see the site is essentially cleared in its entirety or at least the, you know, the relevant portions of the site right up to the waiting river down here in the bottom corner. Um, and I've heard, you know, through anecdote that
some people that are familiar with the site through history, you know, used to fish right on the bank of the river there. Here we have 1971. It looks like it's maybe starting to grow in a little bit, but, you know, again, still still a pretty open site in this regard.
1980 that progression continues a bit. 1996 and '96 is an important year because that's when the rivers protection act um came down and regulations went out for riverfront area. This is an important image and we'll kind of come back to this one a
couple of times because you can see again basically that same footprint is you know visibly disturbed in one way or another. You can see these this dark rectangle here uh is the septic leeching fields. Actually, we have that on a plan
we can look at. We have this white rectangle down in the bottom here in the corner. This is a volleyball court actually. Uh one of the posts is still out there you can go see. And then the in my thinking of this, I' I've kind of
thought of this squareish shape in the top corner of the site. it's effectively always been um you know building parking etc. Uh so as we go down we'll see that highlighted a little bit more clearly but we're essentially thinking of this
you know entire developed square for lack of a better term up in this corner uh as you know relatively unchanged through the years. And we come uh through the 2000s. You can see that volleyball court still
obviously the parking lot still. And it's you kind of watch the progression through the years. Volleyball court definitely some use out in this lawn area over here. You can see that um you know there's variously kind of like
grass and bare areas out here. Some blue something down in the corner there. Again, we still have kind of the core square of the parking area in essentially the same footprint continuing to move down. You know, it
looks like the parking lot had maybe been resurfaced between ' 05 and 2011. Uh but we still have, you know, kind of a gravel fringe down here. We can see a lot of this area, uh, you know, is clearly beat up and grally. Continuing
down, you can kind of see the remnants of the volleyball court down here. again, mostly grally area down in this corner off the bottom of that parking square. Um, so that that's kind of just for some background and context, a little history of the site through the years.
Now, as we start to um kind of look more critically at what we have here and how it pertains to uh your jurisdiction, we have and some of these these shapes will will mostly stay consistent
throughout these figures as it's kind of a point of reference as we move through time. Um we've highlighted this yellow shape here which you know we're kind of calling the rough extent of disturbance in 1996. And again you know this is an
imperfect exercise. The aerials are you know tough to interpret but um you know based on our knowledge of the site and based on our review of the aerial record uh this is kind of what we're calling the the extent of disturbance. So, we
have this volleyball court down here still and the two septic le fields up here. Still, uh we've also kind of to be able to look at it in two different ways for most of these images, we've we've overlaid the 2026 site plan um from Craig of Rim
Engineering as as a point of comparison. So we can see, you know, the the outline of the building uh on the survey plan matches up with the outline of the building that we can see through the aerial here. You've got the leeching fields over here. Um I've also kind of
highlighted the the volleyball court as as a point of reference again as we go through time here. And we jump up to here we have a 2023 image. Um, so my client, the current owner, purchased the site um, a little bit after this image was taken. I
believe it was April of 2024 he took ownership. Uh, we're showing that same rectanglish shape down here where that volleyball court had been. We can see that a decent chunk of this area in here is still unveated. And still as we go
through time, we have essentially the same core square of the parkworking area and building again unchanged. Here's that overlaid with that survey plan again. And you know, as we kind of talk through this, I'm happy to jump around if the commission finds one of
these more helpful than another. Um, to start looking at some uh areas here, we've kind of quantified again this core square of the parking area. It's a little shy 25,000 square ft in the riverfront area.
I've also highlighted and again an imperfect science. We're judging off of aerials. Uh we've highlighted the area that we can tell from the aerials down here lacks vegetation. Um this is kind of a grally area and you know you can
tell there's a clear difference between the well vegetated areas and the bare areas. So we've quantified that. It's not a whole lot. It's about 1,800 ft. Uh, and here we go again, kind of showing the these same things. 25,000
square ft out here in the core of the square. About 1,800 square ft of obviously bare area down here. We've also quantified the volleyball court at a little shy of 2,800 square ft as a sort of um you being a a cover of sand,
a sort of grandfathered uh you know disturbed riverfront area in the sense that that was present at the inception of the rivers protection act. I did throw in a photo here just of kind of um you know an area that is still existent. Obviously, we can't see too
well um through the kind of resurfaced area that we're here to talk about, but immediately adjacent to it, you can see um what is more or less an example of what we believe to have been kind of the condition. Uh you know, lacking top soil
and see gravel and asphalt chunks through there. Uh and then the really the the core of what triggered this violation notice uh is what we've highlighted in purple here. And this is traced to uh match the
the survey plan again that Greg from RIM had provided. We have a little shy 8,300 square ft of this kind of resurface parking area down here in the corner. And here we have that all overlaid with
uh what we've quantified as pre-existing degraded areas. And then to kind of take through the the calculation uh we have about 8265 of that purple area up here.
uh we've quantified essentially what we can see and and what there's some evidence for as pre-existing degrated area and subtract that out as 1810. Uh that leaves a remainder of just shy of 6,500 ft.
We have the quote unquote grandfathered volleyball court area which was present again at the inception of the rivers protection act 2770 ft and essentially the remainder comes to 3685
and this we proposed to address in kind of a combination of ways. 3685 square feet. We are proposing straight up removal of almost 3,000 square feet of this purple area down
here. These are aerials get planted. That leaves a remainder of about 750 ft. So if we are going through the riverfront area performance standards and talking about restoration and then mitigation, you know, restoration comes at a 1:1 ratio, mitigation at a 2:1
ratio. Um, so we've then scoped out an area that, you know, slightly exceeds that minimum 2:1 ratio at almost 1,800 square ft. And that's what we have uh down in our green hatched areas, sort of this L-shaped feature. And then another
one over here. Uh, and I will jump quickly over here to uh planting plan. Our proposal uh is just to remove that you know resurface parking area over
here and then remove some existing lawn over here. These both get kind of you know soil amendment as necessary. The soils are kind of junky so it may require some top dressing to you know make it a more appropriate planting medium. Uh and then on the whole just a
little shy of 5,000 square feet of native seated and planted areas, we've got um we're respecting a variety of you know native trees and shrubs in the areas here. Um so that is kind of what
we have gone through in terms of the exercise of trying to evaluate the the history and the pre-existing conditions with which we're working. um and then what we're proposing to you to kind of make up the difference as it were. So I think with that I'd be happy to turn to
the commission for for questions and comments. >> Yeah. Just just for clarity so that everybody see because you have a lot of lines running around uh on your plan. >> Sure. >> Uh if you could just trace the uh inner riparian border and the outer riparian
border as well as the buffer. >> Sure. So this slightly darker pink line on the inner side is the 100 foot inner riparian zone. We have the river off here. Actually it dips off of the plan but kind of arcs around. So 100t inner
riparian zone. The darker pink line here. 200t outer riparian. The lighter pink line out here. We have uh I will jump over to the survey plan because we do have a little wedge of BBW
down here. um that is actually under my legend right here. But the 100 foot buffer zone is this blue arc right here. And then you can see a little wedge of the 25 ft buffer zone peeking out from under the legend.
>> And the both shades of of purple are currently paved. Is that correct? >> Yeah, I'd say um I think the the proper term is probably asphalt millings. >> All right. All right. So it's not >> uh and and the difference between the
two purples is just the inner versus the outer riparian zone. >> So it's kind of loose asphalt gravel or is it actually impervious? >> Yeah, I mean it's I guess gravel is the closest easy comparison, but I think for
all intents and purposes you'd consider it impervious. >> All right. Um questions from commission members? >> [clears throat] >> So you said you're removing that, >> right? So
>> what is the methodology going to be for removal? >> So it's it's certainly something that needs to be done with a machine. Um so it would be a machine coming in there and you know it's it's hard packed but it's you know remove removable with a
machine to kind of scrape that back. Um, and then like I said, you know, it probably needs a little bit of soil amendment because the the soils certainly in this area um are are far from great for a planting medium. It'll get a little bit uh of a soil amendment
in that regard to make it a better planting stratum and then seated and planted with native vegetation. And then kind of over here to the same point, uh this is kind of lawn again kind of junky soils. Uh, so this is just going to be
similarly scrape back with a machine or, you know, you could use something like a sod cutter maybe as well. I'd probably defer to whatever contractor uh on that in that regard, but that gets scraped back to remove that turf grass uh and
then seated with a native seed mix and then planted with with native woody vegetation. >> Thank you. So, I have I have a few comments on this. So, everything that you just went
through in terms of means and methods, how is that being articulated to somebody that's going to be bidding on this? I don't see anything that where a contractor can make this up has to figure out, well, are they going to bid on this document? It should be a set of plans. So, is there a seating spec? Are there
receiving rates? Is there a seeding amendment spec? So I think um you know if if the commission thinks it's necessary I'm sure we can add some more detail to this. We've tried to put together this document here that details you know removal methods timing supervision by a
qualified professional um planting soil amendment uh planting schedule. We have the you know the seed sheet which does have you know application rates. Uh so I think you know we can work on flushing this out a little bit if there is you
know some maybe some soil amendment specs or or other things that you had in mind. Um >> well my concern is if you give this to a contractor will they be able to execute this this cartoon vision in the words that you have. Right. So we have an engineered plan. Do we need an
engineered plan? Do we need a plan that talks about sequencing? Is there enough on this so that the client or your the applicant can get a good bid from a contractor on this? That's what I'm concerned about. And they know exactly what they need to do. >> That's one thing. >> Can I speak >> the second?
>> Sorry. Um I I did the work at 181 and I could definitely do this project under this scope of design just by knowing his key and how his layout is. >> Well, I I don't know who you are. One, two, do I do we know that you're going
to be the contractor? Is it going to be sent to bid or are you just I I don't know. >> I'm Marcus from Landmark Landscape Contractors. >> Okay. So, are you bidding on this project or >> not necessarily bidding? I'm just I'm saying I could utilize this plan and and
accurately install with what the specs are there without a a very elaborate plan. >> Okay. I'm not looking for elaborate again. I'm looking for You mentioned soil amendment. Is there something in there that the contractor knows how much soil they have to import or their seeding rates? They just want to make
sure it's robust enough for a good number. >> Number two, >> for sure. I I think we can certainly take a look at some of those things. >> Okay. Number two, you gave us a lot of numbers. Lot of numbers, but what's fundamentally missing is how do you meet the performance standards for riverfront
in terms of percentage? I didn't hear anything about the So, we were only allowed up to 10% right uh disturbance in the riverfront. So, how big is the riverfront area on the site? What's existing that's degraded? And what will the site end up with once you
restore it? I didn't see any of those numbers anywhere. If you could share those. Yeah, sure thing. So, I think there, you know, you thank you for bringing that up. Um I think that we can probably provide more context to the commission.
Uh you know a more thorough performance standards assessment. Um we have assessed the uh we we do have the measurements from Craig Seagenowski from RIM. Uh as far as
total areas on the site, I think you are correct in the 10% number. Um but as you continue to read through those performance standards, it does say, you know, notwithstanding, right? Um when the yeah, when the applicant proposes
restoration or mitigation. So we will certainly take a spin through that and you know try and outline those more clearly on kind of a pointby-oint basis if that's >> right. Is that kind of what you're looking for? >> We need that on the plan because what's
going to happen is 5 years from now, right? We need to know where we're at, but what that 10%, how close are they? Can they do anything else on site? If somebody comes in 5 years from now and says we want to add parking and we say you do not meet the performance standards for riverfront because you're
already over that, you know, I know it's probably more than 10% because of the grandfather piece. That's a whole, you know, other thing. But yeah, >> we need to know these numbers so that we can put this in the um this is an enforcement order, John. >> No, there's nothing on this property right now. Okay,
>> that's another question that I have that I will answer after you're done, Lisa. >> Okay. Because we need something to memorialize what the when you walk away, what the existing degraded area is under the under the act. >> Sure. We we will take another Yeah.
Yeah. We'll take another pass through that and, you know, hit those points more directly, more clearly, and make sure they're, you know, clearly enumerated on something that you can easily refer to in your records. >> Okay. Thank you. I just want to ask a clarifying question
as well. Um, if you could go to page 14 of the impact assessment. I'm just trying to follow the math here. I think I understand up to a point. Uh, but the so in that table it talks about uh 8265 is essentially the dark and
light purple areas the combined square footage, right? And that 18 minus 1810 is the sort of uh patched area that was um >> right >> right right pre-existing degraded area.
The the question I have then comes to the the calculation of subtracting the whole square footage of the volleyball court. So, as I understand it, we're talking about the total square footage of the two purple areas combined, and then we're subtracting the entire square
footage of the volleyball court, which only a portion of it overlaps with the purple areas. So, would you correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't you need to figure out the overlapping uh the square footage of the overlapping area, then subtract that amount, not the full square footage?
>> That is correct, Mark. You are correct. >> Okay. Okay, we will we will take a look at that and and see where that leaves us for sure. >> Okay, thank you.
>> Uh other so some of the the remaining items here are to how to lock this in to provide a solution. I think that's that's the main key as we move forward with this for the applicants and the consultant and the commission is to understand what are the next steps for
moving this forward. Now, we got two options. We can either do a friendly enforcement order where this gets done and handled through that. We've done that in the past a couple times and both sides and the parties agreed to it. The other option is to come in for an afteraction notice of intent filed. Either way you're doing this, I would
suggest doing the if you're going to have plantings incorporated into it, I would suggest going the afteraction notice of intent filing because it's cleaner and also it's a lot simpler from a perspective of through DV and also for the landowner having a clean book. Um,
and that's what I would recommend as you move forward with this. Now obviously the challenge with that is you need to make sure that you meet all the degraded thresholds and you basically you know cross your tees and dot your eyes when you come in because D is going to see this as well and they might have comments and reservations with the
permit application. So it's not just us and the commission. It would have to be D as well. So there are some things that you have to talk about with your client obviously on which pathway you want to move forward. And you know, obviously Chris, I think that's something that you and Glenn um can work out and discuss to
kind of get this going. Um our next, you know, deadline for permit applications will be 2 weeks from today. Um you know, if that's something you guys think you guys can meet, I think that would probably be good. Uh because the sooner you guys get this going, you guys can kind of have a game plan moving for fall
planting. I think that would be good. Um the longer you push this out, I think it's going to be, you know, it's it's not a good look. I would just try to get this, you know, on the books as soon as possible. >> Yeah. Yeah, for sure. No, I I understand your point there, John, and I certainly will talk to my client about it. Um, I
know based on my workload at the moment, 2 weeks is a bit optimistic. Um, and I do sometimes, and I guess I'm just thinking out loud here, sometimes I do find that the enforcement order allows you to execute a little bit more quickly. Um,
but we will certainly talk about that and you know, maybe not in 100% of cases, but we will talk about that and and we'll let you know kind of what we come up with uh if that works for you and the commission. >> Yeah. And I I would also say, you know, also keep this in mind that, you know, the riverfront impacts that you are
going to be doing on this property lock in with the property. So, if you're going to say, let's say from that from that diagram that I saw, I think there was like 11 thou um I think it was 111,000 uh riverfront area. I would say that you would then you would have 11,000 um you
know riverfront area to play with if it's 10%. If you're coming in with 8,000 per se of impacts that you're whether you are mitigating or not, you're you're handcuffing yourself for future pro for future projects on the property. Just keep that in mind because my
understanding is that that property itself is primarily within the riverfront area. >> So that's something >> it is largely it is largely in the riverfront. >> So I think that's something Mr. Stoer should should uh you know think about as he moves forward uh because I know he's
got a growing business and I know that he wants to do good over there and you know I'm just looking out for him and his his business the same point. You know I want to make sure that you know he understands you know the complexities with this this infraction and everything. So, >> for sure. So, so are you suggesting maybe if there's anything else we're
contemplating to do it all in one shot? >> I think that if you're looking at it from a side of whether you want to restore the area and make make it more refined or make it more uh you know renovation somewhere else on the property, it's probably a good idea to
think about that now because you know if you wanted to do mitigation over there, you'd be looking at 8,000 ft of mitigation one to one. But at the same point, you know, if you're looking to do something else on the property, you go with forward with this, you get the parking lot, you lock yourself in for
the tenure of the property. You're basically handcuffing yourself. So, it's in your best interest to understand what the complexities are with the decisions that you're going to make moving forward. >> For sure. Thank you for that. >> Yep. >> Um, John, does this um property
currently have uh any storm water management? As far as I know, that is not something I looked into. So, I'd have to look, >> but it's definitely something to think about. >> Well, I'm more inclined to go notice
some intent. >> All right. So, Chris, I guess we'll look forward to uh hearing if the choice is going to be a notice of intent or [clears throat] a request for a an enforcement, which is
would be an unusual request, but >> well, I I don't know that it's up to the applicant, the consultant to figure that out, Julian. I think that that should be a decision that the commission makes, >> right? the commission does get to make that decision. But if the if the applicant feels that they would rather
pursue this and they can get the plants in, if we issue an enforcement order today or or within the next couple days to get the plantings going, then I would say that an enforcement order is probably more palatable. But right now, since we're in a drought, I would actually be more hesitant because I think that we should wait till the
drought's done and do a fall planting if that was going to be the schedule that we're looking at. So just my my thoughts, throwing it out there. Yeah, it kind of it kind of is up to to the applicant because it depends on what he decides to do. If he does nothing, it becomes an enforcement,
>> right? But no one's saying it has to be one or the other. Maybe it's the enforcement to get the plantings in and maybe the notice of intent or other work on the property to make it. >> That's fine. >> Just throwing it out there. We got to get creative, think outside of the box. Thank you. >> All right. So, I think that wraps up
292, correct? So, thank you Chris. >> Thank you [clears throat] folks. Have a good night. >> Thank you. >> And I don't think we have any hearings that where there has been a request for uh continuation. >> Um so the next item on the agenda is
potential reorganization of the commission because it is that time of the year. Um I've been chair for a long time. If anyone else would like to consider um being here, uh I'm fine with that. Um
the downside is you have to kind of come to town hall every meeting, which is a little bit of a pain, but fortunately my schedule is flexible. So, uh, anyone want to propose
nominations for We have a chair, vice chair, um, clerk, and I think there's >> Yeah, I I say we start with the clerk first. >> I'd like to nominate Dan as the clerk.
>> I'll second that. >> Yep. Fine. All right. So, uh, that's a motion. Uh, and you accept the nomination. >> I I accepted the [clears throat] nomination. Einstein was a clerk. Chaucer was a clerk. Lots of great
clerks in the world. >> All right. We'll see how you do. Thank you. Um, all right. So, we have a full board. So, um, start with Courtney, Joe, and Mark. How do you vote? Yay or nay?
[clears throat] Yay. Yay. >> Uh, and then um I guess you you don't I'll throw in I'll throw in I and Lisa. >> No problem. >> Hi. >> All right. So, we've dealt with clerk.
Um, and then we have chair and vice chair. So for vice chair, [clears throat] anyone >> I'd like to nominate Mark as Joe. >> I'll second I'll second that.
>> All right, we have a motion in a second. Again, starting with Courtney, Joe, and Dan. I >> I >> And uh I'll throw in an I. And Lisa,
>> was that an I? I didn't hear. >> Yeah. I >> Okay. [clears throat] All right. Uh and chair, >> I'd like to nominate Lisa Jim. >> I'll second >> and and Lisa I guess I've dodged it long
enough for 23 years. >> Yeah. And just be aware if there are meetings you can't make, I'll be glad to step in or Dan >> or Mark or the vice >> chair. Yeah. Well, but you have to be here. So,
>> all right. I would um I would accept that if I can start in August. >> What's that? First meeting in August. Does that work? >> Yeah, I think we're fine with it. That's for me. [clears throat] >> All right. So, we have a uh a motion.
Let's see who >> made the >> I did. Jen Joe made Joe >> made a motion. >> Seconded it. [clears throat] >> All right. You might have to step in sooner if I
lose my voice. Um [clears throat] uh so uh Courtney, Joe, and Mark, how do you vote? >> I >> I >> I >> and uh Dan and I and I'll throw an I. So
hear it. Starting in August. All right. Next [clears throat] item. Excuse me. uh is treatment of vegetation in northern water bodies. So um maybe you can
>> Yeah. So I just want to let everybody know that um the 5-year program that was instituted 5 years ago uh is up and obviously there's you know we kind of took a sbatical to the treatment in 2026.
Um that was planned just so everybody understands. Uh there was no treatment chemical to the water bodies. That doesn't mean there's no work done to the water bodies that there's no treatment chemical to the water bodies because uh the EPA provides guidance saying that you shouldn't treat it with chemicals
all the time. Otherwise, they grow a potential immunity to them and then it becomes a lot harder and you end up spending more money to try to treat a treat uh a species uh and try to basically uh keep it at bay. Unfortunately, uh the challenges are now
moving forward is that well that means we got to start fresh again and we have a new uh management cycle that we need to basically implement which means we're going to have to go out through the RFP process and all the like of that. So I've briefed the I sent a sevenpage
technical memo which I provided the commission. I sent it out today. I'll send it over to the commission, but I sent out a seven-page technical memo to the town manager and basically advised him on the proper channels to move forward uh with the plan and kind of recommendations from a technical side as
I am the conservation director and my duties and responsibilities are for providing technical oversight, not for project management duties of this plant. So, I just wanted to advise the commission on all that. um as we move forward, you know, I've been receiving calls from residents complaining about
the and actually concerning about the um species in the the reservoir and other water bodies that people frequently use for fishing and boating. Unfortunately, the challenge is is that when you use pcellore twice in a row for I guess for
two years, what happens is that those um the detritus or the breakdown of those natural weeds uh releases a lot of nitrogen phosphorus into the benthic layer and unfortunately a lot of more species can use that to grow and that's
where you get these these basically um algal blooms or you get these um growth patterns that you might not have seen previously. So, uh, we expect that to happen. It's just a it's a temporary thing right now. I just want people to be aware that, you know, we are actively being proactive with trying to help and
manage this, uh, pond, these ponds and lakes here in town. >> All right. Questions? Uh, just a clarification, the benthic layer being the bottom of the >> Yes, you are correct. Sorry, my li
linologist speak is a little off. >> No, no, no, that's all right. No, it's interesting. That's the ocean. The way to describe it in the ocean, too. >> The benthic and the pelagic. >> Yeah. >> Although you wouldn't have a pelagic in a pond, I think. >> It's been a while since I took anology
when I was in college. So, I apologize. >> No, there's nothing to apologize for. >> All right. So, we're all set with that. >> Yeah, for unless there are any other questions. So Javon is it is it every lake and pond or or is it a targeted
approach or how does that work? >> So there are alternate kind of recommendations that the contractor has provided um for different types of species and they like to rotate it. It's almost like crop yield management I guess is kind of the way to say it. And that's how they used it um for a lot of
the treatment specialists or treatment of the ponds. and the specialists um they focused on Charlie Pond, Winnacon Pond and Norton Reservoir. Uh the challenges with Winnacon is that it's very environmental environmentally sensitive. There's a lot of restrictions
when with natural heritage and the ACC. So they have to take extra steps and extra precautions with notifying the proper authorities and getting certain securing certain permits. So it's it's very technical I guess and that's why we rely heavily on the environmental
consultants to advise us on the methodology and the procedures the treatment um you know timing scheduling and everything like that. All right. Um so we are now moving on to our continued
public hearing [clears throat] and that is um first item is file number 250 uh-170 416 Colony Road. Um that's a project
that was modified uh from a one-story building to a two-story building and we had it um reassessed with regard to storm water and you are the representative. Just
introduce yourself. >> Hi uh Rob Luc here with CMG. Good evening everybody and the property owner Ed Andre is also here. >> [clears throat] >> Did you, Mr. Chair, did you want me to give just an update on
kind of where we stand or? >> Yes. I I mean that there was discussion uh it was requested that um we go out that it be reassessed for storm water and give us a summary of what the stormwater findings were.
>> Sure. Um so I agree. I think at the last meeting it was decided that um the project should go out for storm water peer review. So the applicant funded that and um PGB engineering uh ended up sifting through our storm
water report, our plans, narratives, all the information that we presented and actually issued a peer review letter that was dated June 16th of this year. Um, I'm not sure if the commission if all the commission members had a chance
to to read it. It's pretty brief. It's two pages. Um, and essentially, is it Patrick? Yeah, Patrick. Um, just essentially summarize the changes that were being proposed compared to what is
existing in the previous approval. >> Yeah, he did the original review, I believe. >> Correct. Yep. Yep. um and essentially reviewed our new um storm water design and concluded that we
do indeed meet um the mass DP storm water standards and then the Norton storm water management bylaw um as well. And then also the long-term O and M plan is also in compliance with that section. Um,
so with that, um, that's pretty much the update of where we stand now. Um, happy to answer any questions or have you. All right. Any [clears throat]
questions from members? And John, you you've reviewed everything. Yeah, I have a draft of the order conditions to look at after this. So, all right. And then, uh, this is a public hearing, so I'm going to ask if
any people in the audience either on the Zoom or in the room have questions. If not, uh, it sounds like we can consider a motion to close. >> I'll make a motion to close public hearing for file 250-1170.
Second. >> All right, we have a motion made by Lisa and seconded by Dan. And um so Courtney, Joe, and Mark, how do you vote? >> Nine. >> I
>> I >> and Dan I. >> And Lisa, >> I motion carries. So we're um yeah, this is a not intent. So that
closes the hearing and so we'll review a draft order at the end. >> Okay. >> Thank you everybody. [clears throat] >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> And we have zero Mansfield Avenue which is a small
parcel adjacent Alberto's. And last time I believe Eric was the representative and that's still the case. >> Looks like he's here. >> Yes. Good evening. Um Mr. Chairman and
members of the commission. >> Um I'll give just a very brief update. The last time we were here, we we went through the plans um and kind of showed you know what the game plan was for this proposed layown yard. Um, at the time
that we were before you, we had received comments from Pat Brennan, but we had not yet responded. Pat had six comments. Um, we've since responded. We got a letter back the next day uh from Pat indicating that he is satisfied with our
response to the comments um and that the storm water system as designed meets both the state and the local uh requirements and standards for storm water design. Um most of the comments just centered around the infiltration basin that we're proposing itself. We
just had to make a few little tweaks to that and pull it a little bit further away from the uh the wetland boundary uh just to meet a sort of somewhat random requirement in the state standards. Um and then aside from that, while we were in the meeting last time, we had originally proposed a surface treatment
to the layown area as either um processed gravel or reclaimed asphalt. I think I talked myself out of the reclaimed asphalt in the meeting. Uh so we took that off the off the plan and just said it is processed gravel throughout. So really that's it. I think we're uh we're in compliance with
everything we need to be at this point. >> Uh yeah, the um [clears throat] the letter from Pat Brennan was in our uh Google Drive. Uh I don't know if everybody had a chance to look at it, but uh any specific questions about it?
If not, um I think again we can consider a motion to close unless >> So we we can close. I just don't have an order drafted for this project. So if the commission is okay with closing this
out and issuing a potential order at the next meeting, we definitely can do that because it'll be within the 21 days. >> All right. So [clears throat] any further questions from >> Sorry, Eric. from anyone in the meeting. Um, I guess we don't we don't have a we
have an empty meeting room here except for commission members and John. Uh, and I don't know if we have anybody else. I >> think we scared everybody away. >> Scared everybody away. Um, >> thanks. [clears throat] >> So, if no further questions, we >> I have a quick one. Go ahead, Joe.
>> Sorry, I didn't didn't happen to notice on the plans. Did we do something to delineate between the two properties? Uh yes. So I I did discuss that with the applicant. Um because the property is going to be the layown yard is going to be accessed through the other property
beyond the construction entrance. We don't really know where that's going to be exactly. Uh we want to be able to be somewhat flexible in that. But things that we do know is that the access will be outside of the 100 foot buffer zone. So it's outside of jurisdictional areas and the applicant doesn't want anybody who's not supposed to be in there in
there anyway. uh because of primarily insurance reasons. Um so we're just asking respectfully that the commission allow him to self-govern that considering that it is outside of the jurisdictional areas at this point. >> All right.
So if there are no further questions or comments, we can consider a motion to close. I'll make a motion to close the public hearing file 250-1206. >> Second. >> We have a motion by Lisa, second by Mark. So Courtney, Joe, and Mark, how do
you vote? >> I I >> and Dan >> I. >> Lisa >> I. >> And I'll throw in an I. Carries. So thank you Eric. >> Great. Thank you everyone. Have a good
night. Good night. >> Uh, so we have a new public hearing determination number uh 11:49 [clears throat] Zero Island Road and I'm assuming we have a representative of the applicant.
>> Yes, sir. Mr. Chief Scott Faria from Homer Engineering >> and you probably have sharing screen sharing. >> Scott, if you want to share your screen, you have um the ability to do so. to show the plan.
>> I'm going to hope I can, folks. I'm on my I'm on my wife's computer because of course I have technology issues. So hopefully you're seeing >> All right. So I can't blame my wife for anything. >> We've got it. It's there. We've got it. Yeah. >> All right. Good. All right. Well, thank
you folks again. Scott Faria from Homegrren Engineering. Uh representing Habitat for Humanity. Uh, and Habitat was gifted uh, this lot that you're looking at at the corner of Island Road and Lagoon Lane. Uh, it's a small lot, a 40 by 100 foot lot. Uh, back in the
springtime, we went before the Board of Appeals uh, to receive a variance from your zoning bylaws to allow us to construct on this uh, this small lot. Uh, we received a uh, a positive variance from the board of appeals. Uh,
as you folks know, the the reservoir is across the street from the property. Uh, I discussed uh through email uh with Mr. Thomas the the chance of filing an IDA as opposed to a notice of intent uh just to lighten load on the habitat folks uh
a little bit if possible again where that resource area is across the street. So, um what we have is this plan before you uh it's a small house. It's a 20x 36 ft house. Uh we've got it pretty much centered on the lot. Uh set back about
as about as far as we felt like we could to give a little bit of a buffer to the the surrounding neighborhood. Uh the work does fall uh between the 50 and 100 foot buffer zone and within your jurisdiction. So we were uh hoping for a uh a determination with uh with
conditions from from the commission, Mr. Chair. >> Yeah, if you're able just to increase the magnification just a little bit. Um, I think it'll be easier for people to to see the u
the plan. So, [clears throat] just a question. We know this has sewer as um >> Yes. >> And uh but it it I assume it's on a slap. Yeah. You can't put a >> That's >> Yeah, that's correct, sir. It's a
And again, I I have Oh, no. Wait a minute. I got a little plus button. you know, her her computer has buttons in places. I don't have buttons, so I apologize. But there we go. Uh just see if I can move that around. Yeah, you're right, uh Mr. Chair. So, it
does uh it does have sewer available. Uh and for a couple of reasons, just we don't have that much room for the rating. You've got the flood elevation across the street. So, it will be uh it will be a home on on a slab. >> All right. And it's a one story. Not that that's actually relevant to us,
>> right? The example. >> Okay. Questions from commission members. >> So, um, what's the elevation? Well, well, the first thing is I don't see any topography, any contours on here. Did you >> Yeah, it's it's relatively flat. We have
a five contour uh going right through the front and the flood elevation is 1036 across the street. Uh right here in this location here is the flood elevation 1036. So we've got a 105 on the property. It pretty much hangs
around 105. It drops to 1043 in the back and our top of foundation or our top of slab we'll call it at 106 and 1/2. So we're 3 ft above the flood elevation roughly. >> So are you importing any built or place
to make up the gap between the 106 and the 10? Where are you? five, four. >> There'll there will be a little bit of fill around that slab just to just to >> kind of finish off, but I mean it will fill uh you know, even though it's a
slab, they'll they'll still have a a little bit of a of an exposed foundation essentially. So, it just raises it up and and uh makes it look something other than a shed, I guess you'd say. So, it'll have, you know, a little porch in the front and a stair or two going up to it. >> Okay. I I mean I understand we're trying
to keep cost down, but I mean next time I would expect you to have some spot shots at least. >> Okay. >> On the property. So we can tell how much bill was placed. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Actually, if we um if we move out
again, I think some more contours do show. >> Yeah. Yeah. I meant on the lot on like both sides of the house there's >> Yeah. She's she's looking for spot shots on either side of the house. I know. >> Sure. Yep. No, I understand some proposed rates. I'm really struggling. I
apologize, folks. >> That's right. We got it. >> Yeah, we've got some existing contours, but not not much for proposed. So, I I agree with him. You're right. Some proposed rate certainly would help. >> Yeah. I mean, even to tell the contractor so they know how much material they need to bring in, if any.
>> Understood. So, okay. and maybe just put a note that says grade to drain or something on there. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Uh any other
I guess questions from anybody? >> Uh >> I have a couple I have a couple here. >> Material storage on site during excavation work. Is is the stuff going to be trucked away or are you planning? Obviously, you're still going to have frost walls and things like that on
site. >> Yeah, the >> what's the plan for the materials? >> The plan would be to truck it all away. >> So, [clears throat] it'll be it'll be all in out of truck. There will be no on-site storage. >> Exactly. Yes, sir. All right. >> Can we just make sure there's a notation of that on the plan set?
>> Certainly. >> Thank you. John any questions comments? >> I mean obviously you know my typical comments when it comes to RDAs is to have that condition for the sediment and erosion controls to be managed and
monitored um throughout the project and and make sure that for instance I get a call um prior to any construction happening on the site. That's the bare minimum I'm willing to [laughter] basically give. But um you know obviously I think just having that you
know I guess mini pre-construction meeting would be good just to kind of be on the same page. >> We'll certainly do that. >> So John maybe we add that as a note to the plan. >> Yeah I mean that that works too if that if that helps. I mean rather than me
writing in a condition. It's >> we can definitely do that. And the only other thing I would ask you to do, Scott, is to um again for the contractor to put a bid together for this. Is everything going to be loaned and seated that we see outside of the footprint of the house? You might just
want to add a note to that fact. >> Sure. >> Thank you. >> All right. Um any further questions? >> [clears throat] >> If not, we consider a motion to close the um
hearing for the request [snorts] for determination. >> I'll motion to to close. >> Second. >> Uh we have a motion made by Courtney, seconded by Mark. So, uh Courtney, Joe,
and Mark, how do you vote? I >> I >> I >> and Dan I and Lisa >> Hi. >> And I'll show an I. Um [clears throat] since we're right at this hearing, we
can consider a vote as to whether it is a positive or negative determination. And Scott, I'm assuming you're familiar with a negative determination would mean um that you do not have to file a notice
of intent, but the project has to be built according to the plan that agreed upon. >> So um we're looking for a motion probably for a negative three. >> So moved. >> Second. We have a motion by Mark,
seconded by Dan. So again, Courtney, Joe and Mark had a vote. >> I I >> I >> and Dan I. >> And Lisa,
>> and I'll throw in an I. [clears throat] Motion carries. So Scott, I don't want to put you on the spot, but my my assistant, she's going out on vacation for a couple days. So, um, if you want, I can basically, you know, work on drafting up the the
negative3 determination for this, but I'm going to need that revised plan dated for tomorrow. If you can just get if you can just get that to me. Um, a digital would be probably the easiest thing right now and then send me hard copies uh via mail.
>> That would be fine. I can get that to you tomorrow. >> All right. Great. Thank you. >> Appreciate all the help, folks. Have a good night. >> You too. >> You too. Good night. >> Thank you. So, next item on the agenda is um
um old Old Colony Road. Well, are we going to do um No, we've done that. Uh Old Colony Road amended order of conditions. Um
and the copy has just a single box added. >> Oh, no. Is it? No, this is This is the old colony road. Um, this one's the district lights. >> That's 78.
>> So, this one's not on. >> No, this one's this one's going to be at the end >> for the or for the order of condition. >> Oh, it's not on this part. >> All right. So, um, then certific certificate of compliance for 378 Old
Colony Road. Um uh that was >> so that was the septic repair on Old Collier Road. Um >> this is the house location. Um the uh dance studio.
>> This is the one that is right next door to Steve's property at 376. The dance studio >> and the I believe the dance studio is right next door too. Um, but they came in um and they basically needed to take down a bunch of trees to um do a septic
upgrade uh project. And this was the one where they had the car out back. I don't remember if you all remember this, but they had to remove the car from the from the wetlands and a lot of the I guess that they had a trailer back there. So, they had to remove all that stuff. So, that all has been done. Uh and it looks um million times better. Um the whole
area is stabilized. Everything is basically up to up to standard, which is what I like to see. So, I mean, I think for this one, we're just looking for the commission to issue a full um certificate of compliance for this project cuz they did a great job with cleaning up that property.
>> All right, looking for a motion. So, moved. >> I'll make a motion to issue a full COC for 250-119. >> All right, Lisa Dan quietly made the motion just before you. So, you're the second. So, >> I'll second motion. Motion by Dan, second by Lisa. So, um, Courtney, Joe,
and Mark, how do you vote? >> I >> I >> Dan I [snorts] throw it. All right. So, that carries. >> Um, Rail Trail is they ask for a little
more time. >> They asked for a little bit more time. I guess their engineers are out there doing surveys and we got confirmation that they're making some headway. So, that's good. Good to hear. I think Joe's email that he sent me uh really uh did
well. Thank you, Joe. All right. Now, we come to um the amended order conditions for 416 Old Colony Road, which is um a project involving changing a one-story
building to the two-story building that we heard about earlier. Uh I just had one comment. Sure. >> So John, you preface the the amendment statement by saying and shall conform with and then number two says the
conform to >> the state and local. You understand it? So let me just scratch >> the conform to. >> Yes, correct. >> Okay. >> I was probably at the end of the day and I was checked out. So >> you were redundant.
You know what? I got to be redundant. It's fine. I'd rather be redundant than miss something. >> Exactly. >> So, is there >> That's a really com >> Is there an edit there? >> Yes. >> Oh, you got the >> Yes, I got it. Okay, I will make that change.
All right. I think we can consider a motion to uh accept the amended amended order of conditions um as discussed. Well, I'll make that motion.
>> Second. >> Uh, we have a motion made by Lisa, second by Mark and Courtney, Joe, and Mark. How do you vote? >> I I >> I. >> And Dan and Lisa.
>> I >> And I'll throw in an I. Motion carries. And I think that brings us to the end of our agenda. Um, I just wanted to say thank you to the chairman and the vice
chair uh the chairperson and the vice chairperson for their service this season. >> Yeah, thanks guys. >> Julian, how I don't want to I don't want to date you, but how long have you been on the commission for?
>> Uh, 46 years. Well, how long has he been chair? That's the question. >> Well, that I I have no idea. But, um, actually, technically speaking, it's only been 45 years because way back when there was a little bit political snafu
and I was not reappointed pretty >> interesting. And now he needs to ask some questions. Um, >> one more thing. Uh, [snorts] as long as you're here, Megan, when would you like me to come in and sign this week? >> You're going to? >> Yeah. Um, I have everything ready. So, if you want to come in any day, John
knows where everything is, but I'm there till 3 tomorrow. >> Okay. Thank you. Enjoy your uh wherever you're going. >> Going to Niagara Falls. >> Niagara Falls. >> Very excited. >> Slowly, I turn.
All right. So I think we can [clears throat] consider a motion to adjurnn. So >> motion to adjurnn. >> Uh so we got um >> we got a motion between Dan and Courtney. So we'll just say one or the
other first and second. So Courtney, Joe, and Mark, how do you vote? >> I I >> and Dan and Le and I. So thank you guys.