mission which is being recorded. You please stand and salute the flagg to the flag of the United States of America. To the flag of the United States of America [snorts] and to the republic for which it stands. One nation
under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. >> All right. So open for Serious Business LLC. Sur number 501, map 55, lot 3536, Xburg Road. Mike, you can announce your name,
Chris. >> Good evening. I'm Christopher Forier. I own Serious Business LLC. >> Thank you. >> Serious Business, Mr. Chairman and members, uh this is requesting a stockpile and soil permit. This is an
address which is zero Hicksbridge Road but is considered map 55 lots 35 and 36 Hicksbridge Road. He's requested stockpile soil permit for his business. Uh he currently is uh cleared an area as you see if you flip the page you'll see
the area more highlighted. It's about 32 to 35,000 square ft right now that he's opened up in order to relocate his business uh from Sodom Road. Um request is for a new soil permit to stockpile
materials on the property located across the street from the town transfer station on the south side of Hicksbridge Road. The access into the property has been upgraded to allow access for construction vehicles from both directions. The site is to be used for equipment storage and stockpiling of
earth minerals for use in the applicant's construction business. The area for storage will be 1 acre in size into the rear portion of the open area. Wiltons are not located with any of the activity and they're actually approximately 200 ft down slope from
this proposed storage location. Um, if anybody's familiar with the property, it was owned by the trip still is owned by the Trip family. They used to take wood out of there for the build uh the pilings for the docks that Kenny used to construct. There always wasn't access
into the property. It just kind of was never really maintained and open. So Chris has uh again created this area for uh this general business use. Uh he's not selling materials out of here. This is just to allow him if he has excess
materials to drop it on site and maybe be able to use it on a a future job. Recommendations for the board. Uh the Westport Conservation Commission Soil Conservation Board should approve soil permit number 501 for one year for
serious business Hicksbridge Road and that's an acre up to up to an acre of uh area which he is not planning. >> Any questions Chris? >> No. >> No. Any questions from the audience? >> All right. Those questions from the
table. A motion >> approve. Second. Okay. Motion from Jake, second from Jason. All in favor? Opposed? That's unanimously. >> All right. Thank you, Chris. We can get that at the office uh tomorrow maybe. >> Okay. We have to prepare for Betty and
So, 99 Sylvia's Lane. >> Mark, how are you? >> I'm well, thank you. Happy holidays, everybody. >> Too bud Christmas today, wasn't it? >> Should have left your beard long like Santa Claus. It stays like this.
>> Mark Roberts, Analysis and Design Engineering. Uh I'm here to present uh septic repair for Betty [snorts] Sro 99 Sylvia's Lane. This is a small lot uh 5250
ft 70x75 ft. It's located obviously down on Sylvia's Lane. Uh it look the lot itself is about 85 ft from the the water's edge of the Westport River and about 90% of the lot lies within uh a
flood plane of VE16. I've highlighted the elevation 16 on the lot. What we're proposing to do is replace the non-compliant system with a a bottomless sand filter system pre-treated with a Fuji for maximum nitrogen reduction
discharging to a small pump chamber and then to the bottomless sand filter which is 6 by8 ft. Uh this plan has gone before the board of health uh yesterday as a matter of fact last evening uh and was approved for installation. So what we're looking for is just some
endorsement from conservation that we are less than 100 ft from the uh resource area and lying within the uh land subject to flooding coastal. >> Thank you. >> That's all. >> Chris, >> Mr. Chairman, members, Betty Soy, 99
Sylvia's Lane. This is a request for determination of applicability filed by Mark Rogers from AD Engineering. Uh report date is December 4th, 2025. Uh thank you, Mark. Uh board of health approval for this uh filing. Detailed
description of the work the owner has filed to construct a repair to the existing sewage disposal system at 99 Sylvia's Lane. The site is located 89 ft from Mean High Water, which is physically across a gravel way and the neighbors property and within the
riverfront and flood zone VE elevation 16. The work will require the installation of a bottomless sand filter with a septic tank with a Fuji advanced treatment unit. The bottomless sand filter is a perfect fit for this small location with the wells that surround
the property. Uh the activity is exempt under rivers protection act for a septic repair and will not cause any flood zone concerns with this specifically lowprofile design of the bottomless sand filter. Uh resource areas to be impacted
is buffer zone, flood zone, and riverfront. Uh recommendations for the board, the Westport Conservation Commission should approve the bottomless sand filter design system for 99 Sylvia's Lane with a negative box two determination.
>> Any questions, Mark? >> No, sir. >> No comments. Okay. Any comments, questions? >> Just have one question. Is there anything specific about the the Fuji advanced treatment unit like to mention it by brand? Is it something that you >> um it is one of the approved technologies for nitrogen reduction. Uh other systems you'd see might be
Advantex or Singular or other systems vast nitrogen reducing systems. It offers a maximum nitrogen reduction >> and approved by D. Okay. >> Good question. >> I just >> They're relatively new. >> Yeah.
>> How's the price? >> They're relatively high. [laughter] They're competitive with the other relative. You have a small footprint though. That's one thing. >> Yes. I want a small >> and not preceded by a septic. >> Yeah. I've got a place that not my primary house but another one that at
some point will need an upgrade and it's a small [snorts] lot and >> hence your question. >> Just waiting. >> All right. [snorts] Any uh questions from the the table? If not, a motion. Please >> make a motion to approve with negative box two. >> Second.
>> Okay. Okay, that was uh Jason and Jake. All in favor? >> I suppose. That's unanimous. Thank you, Mark. I don't have a sign sheet for this guys in case you want to. >> You don't have a a sheet to sign. No, >> don't you start with an extra seating
and I will go get you one. >> Thank you, sir. And a clip, too. Mark, have a good night. >> All right. Gregory Lavoy TSPEC notice of intent 179 Robert Street to repair septic system and buffer zone to wetland riparian zone
to perennial stream and flood zone A. Good evening. Uh Will Connelly consulting engineers for the record. Uh so the site is 179 Robert Street. There's an existing three-bedroom house with a failed septic on site which we're closing and upgrade to. Uh the site is
bordered by a perial stream to the south, Saudi pond to the west, uh a BBW across the street to the east. And a majority of the site is located in flood zone A posing [snorts] a 1500gallon microfast tank,000gallon
pump chamber and a stone and pipe leeching fields. Um, as you can see in these dashed arcs, uh, those are the 100 foot radi to the well on the subject property as well as the abuing property. Um, so we pretty much stuck the leeching
field the only place we could. Um, we're proposing a dewatering basin which is to be used if necessary as well as silt sock which will wrap around the limit of work. uh that will uh stay in place until the entire site
is stabilized. Um so I think that's about it. If there's any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. [snorts] >> All right, we'll read the report and then uh we'll see if there's any questions. Okay, so Gregory Lavoy, TriSpec Corp, 179 Robert Street, notice of intent, Zenith
Engineering, report dates 124. Uh file numbers SE828118. The agency required to be contacted and status which DP and uh site visit was done on 124. Detailed description of work. The applicants filed a notice of intent to replace septic system on the
property. The site borders on sod pond and a perennial stream that flows into the pond uh under Robert Street. The site has limited area to locate the sewage disposal system and needs a variance to allow work. The proposed design cannot meet the minimum setback of 50 ft from the wetland or from the
bank of the stream. The design as constructed within 25 ft of the wetland at 40 ft from the culver pipe of the stream inlet. The leeching field will be raised approximately 3 ft above existing elevation. Uh the septic tank and the microfast tank will be placed in the rear of the
yard 30 ft from the resource area. Erosion control and area controls will be installed around the entire site and will serve as a limit of work. An area for dewatering has been provided on the plan and the groundwater discharge may be needed to install the septic system.
Resource areas to be impacted are u buffer zone and riverfront and the recommendations the west conservation commission should approve contingent on the board of health approval with standing conditions for the uh disposal system at 179 Robin Street. Have you gone to the board of
health yet? >> Uh to my knowledge we have not received board of health approval yet. >> Okay. All right. Do we have any questions, >> chair? I think the only question I have for him, so the leading field is going to be 3 ft higher. Is that going to
cause any water runoff into [snorts] the perennial stream or any other issues with the wetlands there? Could you say it's a 3T 3 foot or actually yeah, basically yard. Will that create any runoff or any issues that you
guys see? Um, I mean it's going from lawn to lawn, so there will be a little bit of a slope there, but I don't think it'll go first. >> Okay. [snorts] >> Thank you, >> Phil. You have any questions? >> No, I'm I I don't believe it's been before the board yet, but I agree. The
mounted system will and there's certain slopes to the controls runoff. >> Okay. >> Any questions from the audience? >> All right. If no more questions, look for a motion. I'll make a motion to approve subject to board of health approval. >> Second.
>> Withstanding conditions. Right. >> Withstanding conditions. >> All right. Jason and Kevin in >> favor. All in favor? >> Opposed? All right. That's unanimously. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you all for your time. >> Thank you, board. >> You're welcome.
>> Chris got kidnapped. Maybe he fell on the stick. >> All right. Westport Dental notice of intent 7 08 Sanford Road to construct addition in the parking lot and improvements in the buffer zone.
>> Good evening. >> How you doing? >> Brad from DCR behalf of Westport. >> We have your the green cards. Uh I have this mail. >> All right. That's great. Thank you, sir.
>> Yep. >> What we proposed is a notice of intent for a proposed addition at Westport Dental and a parking lot improvement. >> I'm sure you know the property, uh, the dental building, it's here. The parking lot is here. There's a border vegetative
weapon that runs along the eastern portion of the site. Uh the buffer zone pretty much encompasses the majority of the property. What we're proposing is a an [snorts] addition off the rear of the building here.
Um generally within the existing maintained lawn area and we're proposing four new parking spaces at the end of the existing parking area. These parking spaces are proposed as gravel. The remaining area of the parking lot would
be resurfaced. There's a some a minor amount of grading to bring that area up and blend into the adjacent lawn. We are proposing some storm water improvements because this is a commercial property. So, um SNK
Engineering has designed a a rip wrap spreader here to diffuse the storm water leaving the parking area. And we're also proposing um in roof infiltration unit to handle the storm water collected from the roof.
The project is designed so it's just at or just a piece inside 25 ft buffer zone. It's trying to stay on that 25 ft limit. Uh as I said it's generally maintain lawn area through here.
We'll obviously install erosion controls prior to any work start. there's additional details and I know that the engineer has coordinated with the conservation agent to go over some of the other details and uh instructed to come forward with a notice of intent and
that's why we're here. So with that I'll bring it back to you. >> All right. Thank you. >> Thanks. >> Westwalk Dental 708 Sanford Road notice of intent engineering ECR. uh report dates 125 SE80 2820 [clears throat]
and the uh site visit was also 1252025 detailed description of work the applicant is filed to construct in addition to the existing dental office and add four parking spaces in the buffer zone the property has pre-existing the property has pre-existed as a dentist office for 30
years recent ZVA approval has allowed the expansion proposed the wetland line was flagged by private homes ECR yeah ECR All right. >> Yes. >> Okay. You had ERC. Let's go. ECR and is accurately represented wetlands flag A1
through A1. A1 through A24. The proposed 44x 21 edition is off the rear of the building and will be constructed 22 ft from the wetland edge. The proposed extent of work near the near the building will be constructed 22 ft from the wetland edge. I'm sorry. The
proposed extent of the work will have a 25 ft no activity zone for the majority of the site except near the addition in the narrows to 19 ft. The work will also include adding four uh additional paved parking spaces along the rear. Um a
storm water storm water will include roof runoff infiltration into a dry well system and a rip wrap level spreader at the end of the parking lot. The rip wrap apron will slow storm water flow and allow to filter the existing woodland.
The applicant will be in the near will be in in the near future installing a new septic design. The project is meeting the storm water management requirements to the maximum extent feasible on the small area impacted areas of borders buffer zone and
recommendations. Westwell Conservation Commission should consider approving the proposed addition and four parking spaces pending board of health and withstanding conditions roof runoff infiltrated and rip level spreader created board of health approval. What's that?
Is that for the um the runoff? Um >> I think it's the septic design, right? >> I think that's coming next. >> Yeah. >> All right. So, you don't you don't need that right now then. >> All right. I mean it might trigger the board of health u stormwater rig but it
depends on the total area of additional impervious. >> Did you run those calculations to make sure to check that out? See if you meet their storm water rights at the board of health. >> Uh I'll have to follow with the engineer to do that. I know he's going to be filing with the board of health.
>> All right. Well, we can ask Chris. He'll know if he ever comes back one of these days. >> Hey Chris, how you doing? The prints are going to be fine. >> Does this you said you he has um uh penny border health. Does he have did he meet this? Did he trip the storm water
regulations? >> No. >> Okay. So he's not pending bord health then >> he's penning border health for the upgrade of the septic system and it was concerned for the number of dentists relative to the usage of the building. >> But that's the next filing, right? >> Correct.
>> Okay. So there is no necessarily issues with them at this time, but they did make some precursory comments. >> All right. >> I had a question. >> Go ahead, Phil. I just wondered why were there design and requirements or
mandates to construct the addition 22 ft from the wetland edge rather than the 25 ft because we're kind, you know, we have a policy about >> it's a pre-existing building. It's been there for many years. It's in a tight
location. Um, and they've done a great job of trying to fit that in and giving us a 19 ft setback. So, we will gain 19 ft there with it extending to 20 and then over to 25 ft. So, they do give us
25, but not right at that building corner. plus the same. Okay, >> it was just those two sent those the sequence of the sentences I didn't because you have the addition will be constructed 22 ft from the wetland edge
and then it says there'll be no there'll be within 25 ft there'll be no activity except for the addition it narrows to 19. I just didn't quite figure out how they >> Yeah. So 25 ft from this side extends
over to 20 and then to 19 right at the corner of the building. Okay. >> So they are but in this one location they can't u fully >> given the tight constraints of the property. >> I thought that was kind of related to the
parking as distinct from the addition. That's what I was confused about. >> Gotcha. >> Okay. >> And they upgrade the storm water too which is a bonus. >> Yeah. That's good. >> Yes, they're making those improvements. Yes. >> Let's have one one question, Brett. In your presentation, he said the four
additional parking spots are going to be gravel. >> My understanding was that they were going to be gravel, but now when I look this, it says regra. Well, he's going to propose area to be regraded and finished with gravel/pavement. So, um
>> I would say it's going to be paved. >> I'd say go. Okay. Yeah. I I mean I just didn't want you to have a a discrepancy with the ZBA. That was all. >> No. Uh um the ZBA was more for the addition than than the extension of the
parking. But yes, I do believe it's going to be paved and then that rip wrap apron will be able to take that treated water off that um Macadam and treat it before it enters into that resource area. >> Any other questions? Any questions from
the audience? All right. No questions. A motion to approve. >> Motion from Jake. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> Second from Burr. All in favor? >> Opposed. All right. That's unanimous, though. >> Thank you, Brad. Have a good night. >> Have a good night. >> Thank you.
>> Thanks, Brad. >> Thank you. >> Have a nice holiday. >> You guys, too. >> All right. Eversource notice of intent. Hicksbridge Road, duck bank installation, flood zone, and riverfront. >> I got the form to you, Mr. Chairman. I
apologize. >> That's okay. >> The printer is going to have 10 when I get up there, but it wouldn't >> wouldn't speak. >> How are you tonight? >> I did bring a copy of the map and I saw that you guys all >> Yeah, I did. I did. Go ahead. Yes, cuz
we knew they'd be small in relation to so I gave the numbers little ones that they could curve curve you while you were speaking. >> I'm going to just put it up on the page that I have. >> Make sure you leave room on there for extra transformers so we have good power this time.
>> All right, here we go. Okay, >> green cards if I may, Mr. Chair, have all been provided. >> Yeah, they have. >> There you go. >> So, I'm Dorothy Lawrence. with BHB with me today also with James the senior leing specialist with Eversource. Um I'm
here to discuss the uh distributed energy project for [snorts] Eversource and the installation of a duck bank within [clears throat] road and drift road. Um the jurisdictional area here is essentially within the flood plane. [snorts] Um it's the land subject to coastal
storm flow. Everything else is within buffer zone or front area which is the wetlands protection act. Um we did [clears throat] identify wetlands all along the route which you can see I won't finger through it but um you can see we proposed erosion controls along
all of the um the wetlands that we identified along the road and then also along the bridge. Um we're going to be installing this open trench method which is just essentially excavating a trench typically 3 ft wide four to [clears throat] five ft deep um encasing
the duck bank and concrete putting it on a bit of sand back fill tan fill and then repave the area. Uh the work will be limited to the project that can be a portion of the project that can be completed in one day. [clears throat] So then at the end of the day we'll essentially put like one of those steel
plates at the edge so the contractor can come back at the end. But essentially the majority of it will be paid. They'll just have that one end point so they can just pick up where they ended. Um every all the disturbance is temporary in nature. Um the other thing that I wanted to note is that they're not actually
tensioning across the bridge itself. There's existing duct bank already in the bridge that they're going to utilize. They're going to access it through these two manholes right here. [snorts] So they'll essentially install duct bank [clears throat] to the manhole here and to the manhole here um on
either side. Um and that's essentially the gist of the project. Um the jurisdictional area is within one plane here and here. There's only a couple feet in this area. Um this side everything else is in buffer
zone and front area. Um all of it is in the pave and it will return payment once complete. >> I thank you >> chairman. I threw some questions at Dorothy and um I think some of the members may have that question. But first of all, the project's going to
start sometime in February 2026. Um the majority of the work is going to be done on the south side of Hicksbridge Road. Okay. >> Uh with a 4ft deep trench. Um what was the other question I asked you? How far up Horseneck and Drift Road do
you anticipate that work to be really on Horseneck Road? It's only like a couple hundred feet. >> It's only a couple hundred feet right here. And then neck >> and then horses neck really it just appeared to end before you got to that resource area. >> I think it's roughly maybe a half mile on horse neck, but it's not
>> and then they're going to daylight to a pole. Is that what it's intention? >> I would assume so. Um either that or tie into something that's already existing. >> Okay. All right. Um I think that was the three questions I had. I'll read my report, Mr. Chairman. >> Yeah. And and again, oh the other was on
dewatering that any dewatering will be done with a um stacked hayville line um pumping the water into it to allow it to settle or Dorothy mentioned maybe a vacuum truck if if it is needed. But as she mentioned, this is a very quick
operation. The contractor is digging, closing this trench at the end of the day. That's normally and then the wires get pulled through the conduit at a later time. Um, this is kind of a little quicker, so it's not going to be I also asked about traffic around the
Hicksbridge landing. Uh, concerning the time of year u but I think if it's in the winter season, it won't affect too many people, but maybe uh the commercial guys that may try to get in uh if there it's open at certain times during that
time. So this is Absource. This proposed project is Hicks Ridge. Um but it also includes a small section of drift and horse neck roads. Uh just within close proximity to that intersections. Then NOI has been filed by Eversource and all electrical services within the road
layout of Hicksbridge Road from Dartmouth to the Hicksbridge crossing. The Hicks bridge itself crossing the river. Electrical trench will be buried 4ft depth within the roadway. Additional work will be commenced at Hicksbridge where the existing electrical manholes convey electric across the bridge
towards Rafro. The work will fall within the riverfront bordering land subject to flooding in the buffer zone. The activity require excavating and placing conduit pipes and wires being pulled at a later date. Excavating may encounter groundwater. So the applicants have provided detailed sheet for dewatering
that may be needed. This will be accomplished by creating a hay bale lined area to discharge water or they may pump with a vacuum truck depending on what is discovered. Uh this work solely applies to an exemption for utilities in a public way except for where they get into the riverfront
reaches as uh Dorothy showed you in that bordering land subject to flood. Um but again this is an existing manhole within the road of Hicks Bridge. Um so this again is not as uh significant in that area as it appears to be. Um I I think
this is a straightforward project. Um this is an additional utility in in relation to what the overhead wires carry. Um this is two [clears throat] separate I guess as they say they're two separate needs and and not necessarily
is it for specific use. Um they also mentioned the solar entities that are appearing in Westport. This is also for upgrading uh for those sources uh that may be needed as those projects become
uh finalized. Uh that one on Drift Road is Su's Way. Uh the other solar project is actually the one that is permitted is way down [snorts] on the small property at the end of Horsemeck Road. Uh there was another one on Horseneck Road that
was considered but it was not come to fruition because of wetlands concerns and that one was on Paul Gay's property. So, some of this is relative to that, but this is not solely the reason I believe I from what I saw the selections
meeting that it's meant for. Um, I think was that fine when what I said. >> Yeah, we're not affiliated with the solar. >> No, I know. No, but it's they're putting the power back. >> So, they're essentially upgrading the system so that we can intake more um renewables.
>> Okay. Um so for the commission I would recommend the West Conservation consider approving the work with conditions on dewatering be conducted in accordance with the provided detail erosion controls along installed along the edge
of the roadway at the buffer zone areas. Um and again this is given a file number SC802821 with no adverse conditions. That's all Mr. Chairman. >> Thank you questions. I've got a question and a comment. Um I
think during that February time period there'll be some [snorts] commercial oystering. >> Right. >> So if you could just like post when those dates will be that the ramp may not be accessible just just to give the fishermanmen some notice. It's probably
all workable. but elevated that concern to the project management team and they'll hopefully design traffic um and speak to the town ahead of time to try to >> figure out a way to approach that. >> Yeah, there's a turf battle at the other end of the [laughter] ramp. So, you
know, you can't just shut down one and stuff like that. So, and just out of curiosity, I live right in that area. um the there are some houses and some places where you couldn't go off the side of the road, but why was the decision made to tear up the road versus
go off the side of the road and trench it there versus, you know, dig up the asphalt? >> Uh I would assume I that's an engineering question really. Um, the only thing I can make assumption is it's it's probably more beneficial to disturb already disturbed areas whereas the sides of the road are less disturbed.
>> And the road layout, although is larger than what the asphalt is, that may impede stone walls and and other other driveways and and a lot of other things. So >> yeah, you you couldn't do it in some someone's yard, but yeah. >> Well, yeah. Well, obviously, but
>> you probably wouldn't want this, too. >> Yeah. No, >> I did suggest that maybe she contact the highway surveyor uh as well cuz I did identify a covert they missed. Um because some of these it just you don't know where they are unless you know where they are. So I did give her a
little heads up on that one. But I wouldn't be surprised if she may find something in those along J trip section cuz I would assume that water was equalized at one time and sediment and road layout and and things may have >> I also relate that information to
>> I appreciate that and I don't >> the wetland there is actually more than 100. It's roughly 125 ft. That's why it's not mapped on because it's outside of >> correct. Yes, that's why. But I know there's a pipe there cuz the neighbor >> I definitely I I forwarded that whole email change to the project
>> and the neighbor would probably be happy if we damage it too cuz they kind of wanted us to fix it and we were trying to wait. Anyways, that's all I had. >> Yeah. Yeah. If we gained another two or three feet of relatively flat area on the side of the road, it wouldn't be a bad thing. We run and like walk dogs
around there and you go from the the road like it drops right off. >> I [laughter] did part of the delineation on this. It was a very narrow street, very busy road. >> Yeah. >> Okay, that's all. >> Yeah. >> Commercial days too, I think are Tuesday, Thursdays, and Saturdays.
>> That two you said >> Tuesdays, Thursdays, and Saturday commercial. >> Tuesday, Thursday, Saturday. >> Correct. >> Okay, we'll write that down. >> Yeah. >> Any other questions, comments? >> Just a question here. So, this is going
in the existing [snorts] road layout. What is the plan for the repair or bringing it back to its original condition of the roadways? We've had issues in town um with our water line issue on the north end and you know what what is this especially with the time
frame put in February you know putting asphalt back in is obviously not a possibility at that point right or is it >> they as far as I know they're going to repave same day >> so the only thing that will be exposed at the end of the day is a portion which is under the end underneath the steel
>> okay >> um plate to my knowledge if that changes at some point we'll let you I think that's >> I think if I may to the chair that they probably will be obligated through the highway surveyor to obviously that's not a recently paved road but to bring it to
if there's settling obviously Jake's not wrong you get settlement as well as a compact you have frost and eaves and so you're probably going to have some uneven but I think that they would have to bring that up to grade once the settlement ceases in the spring >> so about how many feet a day would you
be uh excavating linear feet probably between I'd say 80 to 100 ft. They usually do it about a day. >> And then the whole project, how many feet is the whole project? >> I don't know off the top of my head. I the total it's 3.4 miles.
>> Wow. Okay. >> Um I think the general length of time they're expecting to do this would be 5 months. >> Okay. >> Um obviously >> there's some Oh, sorry. Sorry. There is some fluctuation in that for things that we can't control such as weather. So,
um, you know, it could potentially get extended should something come up, but that that's the goal. >> Um, >> it seems they always choose the winter, whether it be a solar pro startup project. I think construction is at its
low, so they're able to get contractors, but >> it's also a difficult time of year as well. >> Yeah. Well, traffic will be down, too. You know, >> Oh, yes. Traffic is lighter. Correct. >> Yeah. >> And just another question for the chair. So, you're saying it's a five-month window and you're saying you start in
February, so that puts you in June. Inevitably, there'll be delays. So, we have some pretty uh important businesses in those areas with uh Buzz's Bay Brewery and the winery. Um I mean, if we start getting into a June and July time frame, I think there should be some concerns or at least um alleviate
concerns by maybe not continuing with that project if you're in that time frame in the summertime. So this is another thing that I can sort of move up to the project management level to uh and they can con you know discuss that and perhaps come up with um >> okay >> you know some type of thing that works
for everybody >> concert starts around then you get >> in May >> you get about a thousand cars there at the winery >> at the where is it right on bridge is the winery just look up the summer kind >> is that a night series or
>> it's a late late afternoon Yeah. >> So I can I can you know the like I'm >> environmental so there's not only so much I can do. I can basically you know relay this information to the project management team and just say that these
are concerns that were brought up during the discussion and then >> um they can take it from there. >> Yeah. So along that line, I would just suggest if if [snorts] Eversource would, you know, set up like a website that people could check into like here's the work area we're going to work on today
or here's this week's plan kind of thing just so people could make >> there is a website for this particular project. Okay. Um it's it's on Eversource is it's uh it's the label of the the map uh the distributed energy resource project and it says Dartmouth
Westport >> um as one central area. So there is some information on the Eversource website regarding these projects. >> Well just if they you know updated even on a weekly basis here's the work planned for the week >> that might as the season get rolls forward that might be really helpful.
>> Okay I can again relay that information. And I'm not holding it. I won't put that as a condition in the approval. [laughter] >> I appreciate that. >> Just suggested, >> chair. I got another question. >> Go ahead. >> Um, obviously a lot of this is outside the scope of the conservation, but I think I'm putting on a different uh
[snorts] hat that I have on in town. And I think that there needs to be kind of constant communication and messaging as the project goes on either through the town administrator or through the select board with respect to road closures, impacts. Um, you know, we've seen it
with the waterline and and so I'm just echoing the sentiments that we all kind of brought up is that if this goes into the summertime, there's probably going to be a lot of issues and a lot of concerns. So, you're going to have to at least elevate that or at least have a contingency plan in place that if you
end up in that June or at least after Memorial Day um time frame that you know you're either waiting a little while or a couple months to get back because um you know the per what is the real purpose of this project though? It's essentially an upgrade to the system so
that we can integrate more renewables into >> so it's essentially to integrate with solar and and possible landing of cables for offshore wind here in Westport as well. >> Uh I don't that I don't have any information regarding that and like um >> well there's a threeear window on that but [laughter] it's a good question.
>> Yeah I but I I I don't know specifically like where they're going to draw power >> just building more capacity for a little bit. So, James Clancy with Eversource, senior environmental specialist. Um, as far as this project is concerned, the the PV projects that have already been
approved to connect to this are the only ones that are currently approved to connect to it. So, there's no, from my understanding, there's no offshore wind connections for this portion, this group in this um region of the of the state. It's just solar.
>> Thank you. >> One more question. Um, I think you know where you begin and end would affect the the timing and potential traffic conflicts. You know, you'll have we have a lot less summer traffic coming from
Dartmouth into Westport >> and a lot more traffic coming off of 88 across, you know, heading from uh >> so the west more the western side. >> Correct. >> Yeah. But I mean if the project if it if it commenced on the westbound side
heading east from Westport toward >> winter and then moved forward. >> Yeah. You'd probably have that project knocked off before the spring >> before. So when I can also again relay that information to them um [clears throat] and then let them take take the reigns from there.
>> All right. Any questions? All right. Uh any questions from the audience? No. All right. Motion notice. I'll I'll move to approve the uh [snorts] uh roadway uh installation
project um subject to the conditions that are stated in uh Chris's report including conditions related to to dewatering in accordance with the detailed erosion plans um particularly
in the buffer zone areas and uh dewatering um or vacuum trucks um where that's necessary. >> All right, that was Phil. We have a second. >> Second. >> Second. All in favor? >> Opposed? >> Opposed.
>> All right, that's unanimous. No, I'm sorry. >> I'm I'm just stressing my opposition because I've been continuing to be opposed to this. I really don't know what the future will hold with respect to tying in offshore cables and wind and I'm not a major proponent of solar from the standpoint of clear cutting forest
to put solar in. So nothing against your presentation. It's just how I've been consistent all along. So thank you. >> All right. That was everybody. But Jake, thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> You all have a great night. >> You too.
>> Yep. >> Lawrence. Lawrence. All right, that's it for the hearings tonight. I guess we can uh pay some bills and stuff. Minutes 11:25.
These are yours, Mr. Jason. Let's see who's here. I have a comment on the executive session minutes [snorts] if if that's the right date. >> That is in there. Yes. >> Okay. So, um- which is that it, um, uh,
it's the sentence that says the riverfront regulations and DP policy allow viable alternatives to be sold to remove it as an option. And it's really that they don't allow >> okay >> that they don't allow viable
alternatives to be sold to remove it as an option. >> All right. So, basically, we need to add the word don't in there. We can bring these minutes back next time. >> Yep. >> So after the 88-2, you want to put the word don't. >> Yes. >> Yes. 88-2. >> Okay. Right. Right after 88-2.
>> That's correct. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Obviously with you, young lady. >> All right. So, back to the regular minutes. Uh, it doesn't say who is here. >> I think you had was it Phil, Jason,
myself, and Bert. I think we have all four here. >> Yeah. part. >> All right. I wasn't here either, so >> any change. >> Motion to approve. >> Yeah. >> All right. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> Second. >> Second from Phil. All in favor? >> I want to see extensions. Okay. So, Jason, you get to sign this one because
it's so important. >> All right. >> Ran very smoothly for the record. >> East Bay Media $369 for advertising for hearings. Need a motion to pay. >> Motion to pay. >> Second. >> Second from Phil. That was a who was
that? Kevin and Phil. >> All in favor? Opposed? All right. That's unanimous. >> Uh marine fisheries letter for Dmouth fisher restoreration memorandum. Do you want to discuss that? >> I don't even know what it is. >> All right.
Gentlemen, you can talk about too if you want. Okay. So, we have the October 14th minutes. It was opened by the almighty chair Paul Jonas. Present were commissioners Mr. Mcwigan, Jason Powell, Kevin Carter, and Burr and Phil. We can vote on this.
>> Okay. Motion to approve. >> All right. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> That was Jake and Phil. All in favor? >> I. >> All right. Anybody opposed? All right. It's a good night. 10:28. See if we can keep the keep it going, guys.
Uh was opened by me. President was Jake Tom. That was the one night. That was that was a anomaly. >> Phil and that was it. So that's right. So we can't do this cuz Tom wasn't here. >> Tom dependent again. >> Oh my god. We'll get this. This will be a 2026 deal.
>> All right. WBM Mason bill for office supplies. $145. Need a motion to pay. >> Pay. Second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> Jac um uh Jason. There's no signature on this. You want me to sign the form
itself or >> what is that? >> It's a bill. >> This is just a statement account. You don't have to go. >> Oh, all right. >> It just has to be sent over to >> All right. So, we're going to we can resend that vote then. They don't need it.
>> I'll have to send it over. We've already we've already submitted those. >> Okay. >> All right. So, we don't That vote is not necessary, guys. >> No. >> All right. Uh Mr. Chris, what do you have for us, buddy? >> This is um the Grace Grisville Dam. Um I
was going to bring this up at the next meeting, but this is a little bit of a concern. The state has is willing to make changes to the Grismill Dam. Um but in the meantime, the current owner has pulled boards out of the dam to lower
the water level. So, the fish commissioners have been with a conversation with the owner who has ignored their offerings to repair this with um volunteers and volunteered lumber. So,
the homeowner has come into some concerns over the past couple months with use of the property. I think some people are aware there was a a canteen trailer put on the property in hopes that they would be able to utilize it,
but I think under the ZBA ruling for the property, it was not something that should be allowed. The reason I'm stating this, there was some retalatory, I believe, action taken by this owner to pull these boards out. Um, I am going to
be meeting with Brad Chase. I haven't been able to schedule a time yet. Uh he's willing to come before the board, but what he's asking to do cuz the applicant has to maintain a certain water level per his memorandum agreement
with the state to operate and uh utilize this dam. He has to maintain a water level that is above the um mouth of the actual fish ladder. And currently the fish ladder is high and dry because of the boards being lowered. So I have been
in conversation with Mr. Chase on if he was aware of the board removals. He said yes. Um but then he mentioned that the homeown the landowner will will may reinstall the board. So I wanted to
clarify before I came to this board that >> it shouldn't be a question if he does. It should be he has to Um, and so that's something I wanted to clarify before I brought it to your full attention, but that's generally what this is. And then this is the wetlands
policy for allowance of the diagonalist fishery stream management. So the law allows the DMF to do the work under the exemptions. Um, even though the fish commissioners were going to help repair it, he chose to have the DMF do it,
which is fine. Um, but at the same time, they're considering potentially lowering the ladder uh to a certain degree. I just didn't want to see it be lowered to the level that it is now. Um, because there is inadequate water for skating and other
recreational uses that occur on the pond. Um, so I will be further bringing that to your uh attention. The second thing today, Phil and I attended the D site visit for uh Jonathan Buckman
Banner Construction um with the uh state as well as the opponents. It it was uh interesting in discussion. Um I think we still have a fair chance to
uh influence the state's determinations on the property. We also had a discussion with town council to submit a letter in response to their uh superseding request. And Phil and I
spoke on the phone with Alex uh Weiss from KP Law and he is uh in the process of finalizing that letter. I just got >> the information from Michael to him. Mhm. >> So
um amongst this discussion um it was brought to light um by Phil and the consideration the board may have if the applicant was willing to place a
conservation restriction in lie of using the alternative location and allowing him to access that area. Um, with that said, I I don't know if the board wants to consider this that
right now. It it's that it would be pulled from the superseding level and brought back to a public hearing which we would have to amend uh our decision to deny and bring it
back to the table. In the meantime, Mr. Buckman has a large hurdle and that is the planning board. The planning board has specific requirements relative to this prior approval that Mr. Buckman
would have to present his case. Um I speaking with Michael Burus, the town planner, he felt that the way the flexible frontage regulation was written, it's meant to protect rivers.
It's meant to vet scenic areas and it may not be permissible as he has represented on his portrayal of accessing that area. So, Phil and I spoke to the state and to Mr. Buckman um
and his attorney that we believe he should at least be applying to the planning board um in getting their blessing or their non-blessing. I think
before this commission should consider allowing a conservation restriction. That's just my opinion. Um, but I also think this would set a precedent for the community [snorts] and I thought that a
third-party review from the state may help us to uh get some of those questions answered. Um, that we feel that this clearly is um not meeting in some aspects as far as the alternative
lot that is available that would not alter any wetlands. Um again, the Mr. Buckman's attorney thinks otherwise and he thinks all financial um matters relative to the use and value
of this property comes into play. Um being a uh scenic river lot. Um we did walk out to the property. We allowed Mr. Buckman that um to bring us out to the area. Um again it's it's a lovely area
but it it is a quite a difficult task to get there which Mr. Buckman has presented a plan um that represents meeting all performance standards. So his design was above and beyond um what
what would be allowed by others. I mean he was creating some bridges and where you didn't have to. So uh that's just an update for the board. Um >> so >> again just to give you that uh >> if we came here and said that you know
we wanted uh to do the conservation restriction route he may not still may not be able to do it anyway because the town the planning board has to allow it too as well. Yes, that with that CR I would say it could sweeten the
planning board's consideration because he would be preserving and protecting an area. But again, Michael didn't feel that the plan reflected what the flexible frontage rules are. He felt that it was
it was um again just in his opinion was not what that rule was designed for. It was designed to allow someone to develop something with the preservation of the land in mind and not again making the
most use of the land in other words. So um that that's um basically where we're at right now. So, the town council has created this letter. He had some questions for dates that Michael Boris's letter reflected on the plans he
reviewed. We have since um changed that. So, I think this letter could be available to send to the state by the end of the week. >> So, do we need to act on putting it on the agenda to discuss the CR
conservation restriction for next meeting? Well, I think if we would do that, we would probably do it in executive session. >> Okay. >> But um >> Agreed. Ju ju just just to just to
clarify I actually didn't I did raise after the ab butter uh the property the abutter and had seen the property I kind of understood more about what the the the particular butter there he that per
you know what what their issue was with you know which involved what we saw on that that basically basically um Mr. Buckman, you know, kind of came in with the three houses proposal, right? >> And one involved the driveway up his,
you know, uh uh on one side of the property, the the lane that was never really approved. And um and so, uh I didn't propose doing a conservation restriction. And I just said well you
know uh you know that under certain circumstances this might be an opportunity to compromise you know to come up with a compromise not you know but um I've reflected more on that and and I think that there are issues with
that but just two um specific things one is that the um Greg can't remember his last name now uh anyway the D representative indicated that um if there was going to
be any additional filings of papers, it needed it it should be done by January 15th and that would be the cut off date. Um, for example, if we wanted to respond more to the allegations as to why uh
from the applicant because right now the only thing that we're is in motion is the [snorts] um issue with um you know the pre-existing permit. Um and then the the second thing that the so that given
holiday and everything that's a fairly tight decision timeline of what what we're going to do but the thing that is kind of unclear at this point is uh that you know Mr. Buckman made the
point that um it almost seemed like there was this rush to purchase the property and he didn't really pay attention and he added this extension so it didn't fall out just to keep his options open. He never really even gone he never really even entered that part
of the property to see what was going on. But what the wetlands rag says is that is that the um the application has to be filed with like the zoning board. That's the normal thing. So it's not
it's still not clear to me what the planning board is going to do. He could still he could still file an application and come back and ask us to make a decision based on the or pursue the SOC
because if he was starting from scratch, it would be a normal thing to come to the conservation commission and get our approval before he might go to the zoning board because it's, you know, um
so Uh um so I don't know quite how that's going to work out because I think the letter from the lawyer is not going to say stop the SOC review project. It's
just that the applicant needs to file an application. And so he might file an application but still come here and say [snorts] okay I filed my application. Um, and I think that [snorts]
the substance of the conversation was the applicant reiterating his position that an alternative could turn on whether uh on the property value of the house that
he wanted to construct [snorts] versus the alternative. and he's still making that case and I made the case that I thought there's no basis in the wetland regulations for that uh for that position and and I
don't think that uh the the person from D really said well I you know we have to come back and think about that you know like he didn't really have an answer off you know off the top of his head about it which is really um you know somewhat the biggest part of
And I think the part with the compromise how we think about it is the problem or the is that in both the you know exception policy and also I think in the wetlands regulations
it um says you shouldn't be um doing transactions like land transactions that eliminate an alternative before you come in and like like, okay, you know, this property is
big enough for two houses and I want my house here, so I'm just going to sell off this other property and then come in and say there's no alternative. This is the only where before >> you're creating a hardship. >> Yeah. Yeah. Creating a hardship. you can't create a hardship and and uh you
know so even though uh so uh I just to say I am not advocating you know for a compromise because I
uh but the um if the alternative is that um either he or someone else depending on
what the select board does ends up because he can't get to what he wants. His well, if I can't get what I want, I'm going to have build three houses here if the planning board lets me.
And that is uh um and so [snorts] it it's really a mess to be honest. It's really pretty messy, but at least at this point, I think we're going to submit the letter that is going to if D
agrees is going to compel him to file an application. >> Well, if the three houses are out of our jurisdiction, then I don't understand why that matters. I mean, >> they wouldn't be they would be in our jurisdiction. That's the only way that he could construct something would be to [snorts]
>> Is that like give me this or this is going to happen? Did you feel that's is that what you felt? Did you feel >> No, I Well, I think that >> what I want I'm going to build three houses here. Well, I think I think that
um [snorts] it it I I would say that um it seems extremely unlikely that based on he was that he was selling that he would just simply say fine I'll build my house on the on the
2acre. How big is it Chris? the 2acre >> 1.37 acres >> on the 1.3 which is right next to the roadway. He's just not going to do that. So then he's going to have to make a decision as to what to do with the rest of the land of the 14 acre parcel which
might be he'll just say, "Well, I'm going to sell it, you know, and let somebody else deal with it." Or he would say because he believes he would have the right to complete the paper road and build a road there to get access outside
the wetland area and you know build um a house there and build a house. Maybe it wouldn't be three houses. I don't know how [snorts] you know and build you know two you know two homes at a minimum. the one that the select board I mean that
the planning [snorts] board approved and the other one that um he has access to which has never been constructed. So >> do we need another executive session to discuss anything next week or next meeting I should say?
>> Are we all are we all set? [snorts] I I I don't know how the board wants to go if the board what we voted to send this letter which we are about to send. [snorts] So >> the D has given us parties to discuss
till January 15th and then after January they will take over and render a decision. I don't know if he can get with the planning board by January 15th. Um I certainly
think he could potentially um get something before them, [snorts] but I'm not aware of their time schedule. So >> we could put a meeting executive session just on the agenda. We don't have to have it, but just so it's there in case we do want to have it.
>> I would suggest it. I mean, t typically I'm on a lot of the other meetings I go to. Executive session is always at the end of the agenda for every meeting just in case you want. >> I was going to say I got a call from Alex or rather a email because Adam immediately left and called him and
said, >> "Oh, they said they may go with a CR." So, Alex is like, "Oh, so >> yeah." >> So, he sent me an email saying, "I think we should maybe discuss." So, why don't we schedule a conversation with him at
the end of the week, >> right? >> And and go from there, >> right? Right. >> Um, again, again, the attorneys are friendly with each other. That's why the call went to each other and um, Alex did know state that he knows Adam and I'm sure they've dealt with many issues
before. But, >> um, that's where I would wait. I would schedule it, Leon, put an executive session. I would just have it on the end >> on the next agenda and we'll we'll see if we need to come to that. >> I would have it on the end of every agenda to be honest with you before just that just have it there. If we don't we
don't do it, we don't do it. You don't have I mean you don't have to go into executive session, but if it's there you can. >> Okay. >> All right. That's just a good rule of thumb. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Well, I I guess my I think that um to me the next step that
we could have the conversation with [snorts] Alex about once they receive the letter is whether or not they will file an application with the select board or not. Right. >> [snorts] >> And then and then I think that that
would then give us uh springboard's not the right we really kind of understand that and then D would have to if we
anyway [snorts] we can talk about it more but to me that is the we're >> our next meeting is 23rd is everyone going to be here is is >> uh yeah, it might not be here. I don't know. >> So, I want to make
>> Why don't we Why don't we just send an email? Why don't you send an email tomorrow? Everybody can get back to you and check the schedule just to make sure. >> Okay. >> And when they get home, they can check the schedule tomorrow cuz that's a 23rd is kind of a tight date. >> Yeah, right now we have a light well we have a light agenda. See the other
matter is the DCR issue which is to be brought to the board as opening the meeting but immediately [snorts] continuing it. So we want to have a discussion on DCR because they agreed to get Meepa's comments and they signed the 21-day waiver form. So we would just be
opening the hearing and continuing to a date in the future. So um I think we have one other hearing with that and a couple COC's. So yeah, it's on a heavy agenda at the moment. >> Yes. >> To Chris's point, I wanted to see if we
could maybe There's been a lot of push back on the DCR plan. Obviously, they saw what happened last time and not happy with the new plan that's been presented. So, I wanted to see if there was a possibility for the conservation commission to send a letter to the fire
chief Baldwin uh asking his opinion of the letter that was originally submitted um whether he thought that that was necessary. I mean, most of it was just recommendations and pushing for the state to actually maintain the current
road, but maybe just to see if we could send a letter to the chief and ask for clarification of what was really meant. um based on the regulations that were cited. >> Yeah, I think that's fine because I a lot of times you see the private road the fire department always says they like x foot w x feet of width but when
it's not feasible or within you know reasonably feasible you know sometimes this wet line sometimes it's just the expense then they they they you know give it a waiver and they they shrink that down. I mean, you know, again, it's it's a matter of what you want versus what you need. And I think they may need
less than what they would like. And I, you know, I think that's a poor reason to do the destruction that they're doing and doing my >> I would ask that you make a motion for that. I have no problem. >> I just I just made one. >> I second it. >> There you go. >> See that? >> Make a motion to send that letter to the
uh fire department asking me what their actual needs are versus their wants. >> Thank you. because it's, you know, I don't I think that's a poor excuse to destroy the dunes at parts Nick Beach. >> And and just to point out, Bridge Street, which is a public way to access
that healthy trail, is only 16 ft wide. >> Very narrow >> right now. >> Right now. >> And it's two-way traffic all I mean cars cuz they >> you all the time. People live on that road. So I don't think that they need 16 ft. I mean, I can't understand why they can't get over 10 or 12 feet on the beach. >> They want 20. They want 20.
>> Yeah. Okay. They want more more than more than bridge street that gets them there. >> So they're going to go up a 16 foot road to get to a 20 foot road. [laughter] >> All right. Makes a lot of sense. >> All right. That's [snorts] all I have to say. >> Not the smartest guy in the room, but I'll tell you it doesn't make sense to me. >> May have to take a photo of that.
>> The dams. Where is that located exactly? >> The Grismill Dam. >> The one at your home Adams Pond. >> Yeah. On your way home. >> I drive by that all the time. >> Yes, you do. Yeah. You notice it's a little lower. You Yeah, it's
>> But we haven't had a had a lot of rain. It's been dry, right? >> Oh, no. We've had two two inches of rain. That That sun would be >> Yeah. At least the rocks would be covered if the bullets were there. >> But before we move on, let me just
finish my motion. I made my motion. Jake seconded it. And we need a vote. All in favor? This is to send the letter to opposed. Okay. Go ahead, Jason. So you kind of co-mingled two things without any discussion. It was the the um the
dam and then the Buckman project. On that [snorts] dam um Brad I was part of that project way back when I was in the fish commission. And that fish ladder was never well designed for repairing
>> and uh Ralph Gild had already paid for it. It was already in process and I everyone felt really bad, but when it was installed, everyone knew it wouldn't be effective. So, if that has to be modified or tweaked,
>> just get Brad's opinion on it. It >> Why spend money fixing something that has never worked? >> Yep. It's the time. >> No. Again, usually his intention is to lower it, but I want to make sure it's not lowered to the benefit of the homeowner because >> I'm not I'm making an assumption here. I
think the pentock may be bringing water into the building and maybe causing moisture concerns. I I don't know. But when the pentock when the pond is full, the pentock is full and the water doesn't necessarily they can let the water go through the building or it can
bypass close it and let it all go out the dam. So I'm just I don't know why all of a sudden he feels he needed to do that. So again, but yes, I would certainly agree with Brad's concerns. All right, thank you. >> We have a motion to adjurnn.
>> Second. >> Second. >> All in favor? Opposed? That's unanimously on. Thank you.