e e e that one's actually behind all right good evening it's now 7 o'clock on Tuesday April 23rd the 20 of 2024 it's time to call to order this meeting of the CHC Conservation Commission my name is Carl Bishoff I am the chair of the Conservation Commission and we will be following the published published and posted agenda the meeting is both in person and through Zoom we will continue the meeting in person only in the case of the zoom meeting not working properly it is being recorded and it is going to be available on the you on the tel media website and on the YouTube um I will say right now that um we were here far too late uh at our last meeting and um we are none of us want to be here that late again as I'm sure many of you also don't want to be here that late so we're going to start limiting a little more some of our um discussions uh little tighter so um just be aware if I'm pushing a little bit um it's trying to keep the meeting moving so um it's it's in the interest of everybody uh getting out of here at a reasonable time we still want to be thorough and compliant so um keep that all in mind um and so we start with uh citizens concerns Open Session are there any issues that want to be brought to the attention of the commission that are not on our agenda and I am told we have one person who has something crystala Valley uh 10 Edgewood Road uh Precinct 10 town meeting rep um I wanted to bring to your attention something I noticed this weekend uh while I was driving on riverneck road um the St Joseph Cemetery I believe uh was in the process of clearing a ton of trees um massive trees and I wasn't sure if you were aware of it if uh it was a known um area because I think that there's a Vernal pool in that area as well um at least I thought I saw one on the gis map um so I wasn't sure if you guys were aware so I want to make you aware okay thank you will thank you appreciate your input thanks anyone else have anything else no okay so first on our agenda in uh the Open session is the request for certificate of compliance at 12958 this is the 28 Central Square uh site David you did visit the site I think yes uh I visited the well I visited it twice uh the last time uh was last Friday I visited with Jim Harrington who's the closing attorney I think working for the seller um and uh that was very helpful um I I hadn't noticed it before but actually the the property line had been staked so so uh I I was able to see that um the the issue here um uh as you know from the site visit and thinking about a little bit more is that it's become in it's become infested with invasives you know in particular Japanese knotweed which which really was not on anyone's radar screen in 2001 when this order of conditions was issued so that's so that's so that's well that's one of the reasons why it doesn't look like nicely you know uh mode mode grass uh any longer um I there's also a question in my mind whether the parking lot and the adjacent property uh went in uh in the meantime but anyway that's not an issue for this so um so I I I recommend you know the the commission issue the certificate of compliance because you know there's nothing in the order about in controlling invasives that and that's just you know outside the scope of the original order of conditions okay any questions from anyone no I move Sor I move that we issue a certificate compliance second motion from Chris second by Mark all in favor I hi I okay we will sign that and um move on to our next one thank you David um next one is also a request for a certificate of compliance 29-0 755 this is for eight Lady Slipper Lane um and I believe you also looked at that site yes as well yes um I visited the site with Brian um last uh last Tuesday a a week ago um the the issue there is U everything looks good Brian has issued a certification the only issue there is that a fence there's a fence surrounding the perimeter of the lawn um which which uh isn't the fenes actually are exempt however there's a requirement there that there be 6 in of clearance left between the ground and you know the lowest part of the fence to allow for wildlife passage uh and this one does not is not in compliance with that so you know every everything with regard to the project uh is fine but you know that's the fence the fence is not in compliance with the exemption so any idea how long ago that fence was installed uh I don't do you know Brian uh for the record Brian G hanok Associates so the original order was issued back in 2012 and it would have been installed 2012 2013 so what's that 12 years ago 11 years ago at this point okay and so the fence is not compliant the fence is not compliant but the original order was saying yeah yeah okay um looking around the commission Chris do you have any thoughts or I'm okay with it I'd be willing to wave wave it Mark yeah I I don't have a problem with it I mean if the space is probably 3 and a half Ines in the in the fencing what kind of fence is it so it's a it's an aluminum um kind of picket so it's got the half inch um rails between it so you know they're yay big it's not the small chain length fence and there were sort of areas that were not flush with the ground that helps at all if they can't get in because it's too small I'm not worried about not getting out I'm okay with it okay I'm fine uh David total length roughly of the fence big little um probably 100 feet yeah it's the entire it's the backyard and is that on the lawn area excuse me sorry Brian is that on the coolest side or the opposite side of ladyes slipper if I have my geography it's on the opposite side correct it's up it's uphill from yes yes okay got it thank you John all s uh I'll take a motion so that there actually two motions are needed because there's one for the original and one for the amended what conditions you can do it all on the same motion okay is issue the two I move that we issue the certificates of clance for both the original and the amended motion by Chris second second second by John I see the arm all in favor I okay thank you Bri Brian thanks for helping on that there we go again and next is the uh report on the uh from the planning board liaison hello again um so last meeting we appr we did end up approving uh 181 chelsford Street uh the car wash uh we don't have the agenda yet for the May 8th meeting um but we did continue 270 Bill R hrth and 93 B brick hilm to that meeting uh so we'll be hearing those then um but we don't have the rest of the agenda out yet uh one thing I did want to point out our meetings starting in May because of the uh the way the days fall in that month are going to be staggered so it won't be the same week uh starting in May it'll be a staggered week uh so just keep that in mind with timing of any questions or anything like that it'll be a little bit different okay um Chris the uh status of a uh aquafer protection permit for 191 chumford is that an action that your board did take or will take yeah for 191 chelsford uh that has all been approved okay thank you finalizing the uh facts on the decision thank you okay thank you Chris appreciate appreciate the update um regulatory hearings moving forward the first one here is in RDA town of chelsford 190 119 and 15 50 millroad uh R Trevor our friend Trevor is here representing the applicant and we do have a notice I believe pursuing to the provisions of the Massachusetts Wetlands protection act Mass General laes chapter 131 section 40 and the chelon wetlands bylaw chapter 187 the chood Conservation Commission will conduct a public Hearing in room 204 at the cheler town offices on Tuesday April 23rd 2024 to consider the request for the termination from applicability filed by the town of chelmford for proposed work within 100t buffer zone to bordering vegetated Wetlands at the paved public road right away in the vicinity of 119 and 150 mil Road the project entails installation of three new catch basins manhole and the connecting drain lines so uh in this location uh if you are familiar with milroad um it's on the uh Belly of the road so all water runs to the this point and currently what happens is you know the water builds up on either side of the road sediment builds up there and then eventually it roads the side of the road and everything washes down uh into the stream right there so to fix that uh what we're proposing to do is uh install deep three deep sump catch Basin in the area and Link them to a manhole um and um um that way it collects that storm water treats it with the Deep sump catch basins and then properly discharges it um the the other thing is uh I've proposed silt fence and sock around the perimeter of this whole area so that you know every if there's any uh disturbance outside of edge of pavement um you know it will capture if there's a rain event um that's the other thing but uh you know most the this type of dra work what happens is they will bring the structures to the site a week or two before stage it in the area and then all aggregate material excavated and any aggregate material put back in is handled that day it's not really stockpiled on site okay David anything to add um so so uh at least in theory anyway Trevor all of the work is within the paved correct pavement correct in in theory there might be a little disturbance outside but uh that will be loomed and seated if if need be so I think I I think you know being extra safe with erosion control I think that's fine okay okay Chris I'm good Carl yeah Mark I'm good good good time all set okay so need to close the hearing first I move to close the hearing uh public uh comment any public comment look like Noe no public comment okay move to close the hearing from Chris second from John all in favor to close the hearing I I okay hearing is closed just the negative3 I move conditions yeah I move that we approve with a negative3 determination okay motion from Chris uh uh second from Bill uh all in favor I I motion passes appr record time um we will get that you know the paperwork drill so we'll get that to you Trevor and I think you're on next yep so the next one is also an RDA for the town of chelsford 260 old Westford road which is the Roberts field area uh Trevor again is representing the town of chelsford the DPW and um Chris do we have a uh notice to read again yes uh pursuant to the provisions of the massachusett wetlands protection act Mass general laws chapter 131 section 40 and the chood wetlands bylaw chapter 187 the chood conservation commission will conduct a public hearing here in room 204 in the chelon town offices on Tuesday April 23rd 2024 to consider the request for determination of applicability filed by the town of chelid for proposed work within 100 foot buffer zone to Inland Bank at robertsfield which is uh 260 old westf road further identified as accessus map 58 block 276 lot one the project in TS installation of subdrain and pipe to connect to an existing catch Basin yep so uh in this location uh we witnessed quite a uh quite a few times last year with all the rain that water just sheet flows across that uh big uh grass field um you know grass won't absorb all that water especially with the water we got last year so it sheet flows across and unfortunately uh the um playground is again in kind of a little bit of a belly so it captures the water and you just got to wait till it infiltrates through the ground and gets out of there which can take a day or two so the playground was closed a few days last year so the purpose of this uh drainage project here is uh we plan to install a subdrain that will be essentially uh wrapped in fabric so silts don't get into the uh subdrain pipe um you know filled with stone so water can easily move through it and it's going to be actually Stone all the way to the top so as that water sheet flows across uh on the surface it easily Falls right into that subdrain and runs all the way out to the nearest catch Basin in the street um this again is it within the 100t buffer zone and I've proposed silt sock and fence on the down slope side of of all this work um and yeah the goal of this project is to to capture that sheet flowing water but also make sure that uh we we get that uh playground um to drain quicker right after a rainstorm so we don't have to close it every time okay David any comment uh no uh really simple I think I think the installation of the erosion control is really the only condition again okay all right questions Chris I'm good I guess I'm a little surprised it wasn't done any original engineering I I heard uh we almost tried to put in some drainage at this location originally but it just fell through so here we are now no comment right yeah no com man I know it's a higher pay grade I'm done I'm good yeah John I'm good all right I'll take a motion to close the hearing uh public uh public input any public input I move to close the public hear motion from Chris second from Mark all in favor I I we close the hearing uh let's see take a motion to approve I move to approve with a negative3 determination motion from Chris any uh second second second from Mark uh all in favor I I motion approved thank you Trevor thank you very much Trevor DPW is going to be doing this work right you're not going to hire uh no uh this is going to be this is going to be bid out uh actually the the bid is this Thursday um at 10 or 10:30 it's going to be by a contractor so um in our in my bid documents I put together I you know they'll follow the the uh the settlement controls I propos on this plan but also it specifically uh calls out that they have to follow whatever conditions you guys put forth um for that which uh is part of their their bid documents and they get paid for that so we'll add a pre-construction meeting conditions and and the same is true for the previous RDA yep correct yep so we'll have preconstruction meeting um and we'll discuss this yep okay all right thanks thank you thanks next one we have is a continuation from the last meeting which is an noi which is the 20 Pine and one Frederick Street yes so I received a request for a continuance on that one um uh I I have not yet had a chance to look at D's comments which they've just issued but court courtne me tell Courtney tells me that D has hit them with some pretty substantial requirements so she has uh requested a continuance to May 14th and part part of that project appears to be in the uh natural heritage endangered species no no it's not and it's not I'm just looking at the map here no well well and and and it's confusing it's not in the estimated priority habitat which is which is the regulated Misa habitat it it is in core habitat and critical natural landscape but that has no regulatory bearing that's only for planning purposes okay thank you the map is a little unclear I move to continue to our next meeting of May 14th is that the right meeting to go to yeah I mean that's three weeks 3 weeks away um hopefully be able to make Pro progress I'm going to work closely with on this okay okay motion from Chris second from Mark all in favor to continue hi I motion passes we'll continue that one to May 14th thank you um just a question David you said that so there was a a d number issu a DP number uh has been issued okay they did not post any comments initially so thought we might be able to close tonight but Courtney tells me they have some comments okay all right we won't be closing that all right uh RDA uh this is uh a new uh this is 10 banza Road uh RDA for AGM raka baman 10 Bonanza Road uh the applicant uh and property one and the same and uh we do have a notice pursuant to the provisions of the Massachusetts Wetlands protection act Massachusetts general laws chapter 131 section 40 and the chelon wetlands bylaw chapter 87 the chumon Conservation Commission will conduct a public Hearing in room 204 here at the chumon town offices on Tuesday April 23rd 2024 to consider the request for determination of applicability filed by property owner AGM raban for proposed work within Riverfront area isolated vegetated wetlands and Associated 100t buffer zone at 10 bananza road further identified as the cessor map 118 SL block 451 Lot 21 the project entails cutting filling and removing trees including grinding stumps to regrade backyard and extending existing lawn thank you Chris uh we have the applicant here so I think you're there a yeah I'm on the dun okay so why don't you tell the commission what you want to do yeah so uh my first first priority was if I get the permission to fill the uh wet Lo only on my property not the full of wetland if I don't get that one then I'm also okay to uh not don't touch the Wetland just uh extend my long uh uh outside of the Wetland and there's a hilly area on my uh property uh David has visited yesterday and she also visited last year so I can also I my main target is to uh take the soil from that uphill area and I also have some holes in my backyard use that soil to fill that uh holes and make my backyard uh uh a label one so that I can make some playground for my child there and also I want to put green grasses all over my backyard okay there do you uh want to sure so um I've I I have visited the property um a few times most recently uh was on Monday so if if you look at the screen here this the there's a isolated vegetated Wetland up in this location uh a portion of which is uh on rakib's property um I I I I told him that you know it it it really can't be filled um because if it's filled then it it there will just be more water going on to um you know adjacent properties you know the neighbor's property so um I I explain that to him um he understands um the only the only other potential concern I think with regard to the functions and values of the Wetland is it might be a Vernal pool um on on on Monday I did take some time to to look at it um I didn't see any egg masses or any Tad polls but I think it probably is worth going back taking a um another look a closer look uh my my suggestion to the commission is that if it's not a Vernal pool that um that the commission allow allowed this um I my understanding from rakib is that he he he'd like to go within 10 feet of it um again I think I think if it's not a Vernal pool I don't think that's going to be a problem as long as you know there's erosion a control that's uh put in place um but you know I talked about that with him you know let him know that that needs to be done um so so um you know then then it's mainly it's mainly a matter of um you know doing a doing a little bit of of cutting here removing this High Point here and then putting it over into a depressed depressed area over here uh re replanting it uh with with grass um rakib um I I know in your original submission you said taking trees down but I don't think you're planning to do that right no no so I I'm not taking any trees down okay you see some tree uh St there so I want to grind that one to make this one down so no not cut down any trees yep there are some old stumps up here that will come out as part of the regrading and and he'll wood wood chip those but no no uh trees are proposed to come down so are you planning to go back to perits of ver Vernal pool or or okay yes yeah I'm planning to do that probably Thursday and is the Upland habitat adequate for Vernal pool um it's it's it's really really marginal um I mean there is there is a little bit of Woodland um to uh I guess it it would be the the East uh of the of this pool uh where he's proposing to do the regra regrading up in this area it's it's it's even more marginal it's it's mainly some kind of ground cover I don't know exactly what the species is very low to the ground there is there is some some Leaf litter and I and I know rakib has said that he's seen snakes there um so so I think there's a couple ways the commission could handle this is is to approve this um contingent upon it not being not this not being a Vernal pool and close the hearing tonight with that condition or just keep or just keep it open while I go out and verify and then if it does turn out to be a Vernal pool then you know decide on you know what the commission would would then allow okay John whaton we start at your end I think I'm going with you as far as let's just go to not be in a veral pool and you make your decision on that and that's good with me well I well I'm not I'm not saying it's it categor categorically it's not a Vernal pool I haven't seen any evidence yet that it is um but it it deserves a closer look so what I'm suggesting is you you you could approve it and close it here tonight right you know saying as long as it's not a Vernal pool um rakib can do and he's proposing as long as he doesn't come any closer than 10 feet to it or you could keep it open and and I verify again one way or the other if it does happen to me of Vernal pool then you know we we can keep the hearing open and discuss you know what the commission would allow him to do um if anything I'm I'm good with like I said closing it tonight and letting them get on providing it's not a Vera pool providing the regrading of the Yards are all going to mesh together with everybody else's you know yeah he just wants to make use of his Yad yeah right which is good okay Peter yeah David the only question I would just ask and you've probably done this if you work with a homeowner next time you're out there to see if there's any opportunity to preserve or maintain some of that little bit of Upland habitat that you referenced I don't know if that fits with the homeowner's plans but you know couple of shrubs or something or you know you I'll comfortable you figure fing that out okay sure okay Bill I'm okay with proving it tonight and based on your uh next trip over there and when you're there next time David could you show him where the sil Fen and that would the limit of work would be that you're comfortable with yes um but but he is he is hiring a contractor uh to do this work and I mean it clear that I would have to meet with a contractor right but I want to make sure that the limit of work it doesn't get starts going into the area that you're concerned about so if you could show them where we're expecting the silt fence to be but I'm fine with uh approving it tonight based on your next visit Mark no I think I I could the same been the guys are doing yeah give them a go ahead for until you find something different okay Chris yeah I just want um I want to make sure there's no filling of wetlands that's obviously you know something we don't want to happen and then number two I'd like to see this documented for the files going forward so if we could uh annotate or amend the plan that we have now just to make sure it's clear what's what we're approving and not approving because I want to make sure this there's no confusion 5 10 years from now y good point so um my only question is if you what what are we doing if you do find that it's a Vernal pool so I'm I'm I'm good with the approach of approving contingent on it not being a Vernal pool but what happens if you say oh it is um well in assuming he wants to do some work out there he'd have to refile and the hearing would have to be reopened okay so I want to be clear that that's that's what would happen if that was the case okay so I'll any further questions anything from the audience from the public any questions from the public so Mr chairman I move then that we close this hearing okay I take a motion from Chris second to close and second from Peter all in favor I I hearing's closed take a motion make a motion then that we issue a ne3 well is it a three and be a negative -2 and a negative3 so a negative -2 and three determination to approve the project with the provision that our agent go out and verify that there's not a Vernal pool there and and obviously if there is a veral pool then we'd have to you know resend our approvals um so moved okay with the conditions that uh normal standard conditions yeah motion from Chris second second from Bill all in favor I I motion passes projects approved thank you for your time David will you can be in touch with David to get your uh your information your paperwork but please make sure you have David working with the contractor yeah sure I make sure yep thank you very much thank you I'll be in touch okay moving right along RDA this is a new RDA this is the Stop and Shop supermarket company care of retail business services at 2325 27 Summer Street uh Jennifer Sweet Halen Aldrich is representing the applicant and we have a notice pursuant to the provisions of the Massachusetts Wetlands protection act general laws chapter 131 section 40 and the CH Wetlands bylaw chapter 187 the champ Conservation Commission will conduct a public hearing here in room 204 at the CH toown offices on Tuesday April 23rd 2024 to consider the request for determination of applicability filed by the Stop and Shop supermarket company uh c/o retail business services on behalf of property owners 23-25 Summer Street LLC and 27-29 Summer Street LLC for proposed work within Riverfront area and 100 foot buffer zone to Inland Bank and bordering vegetated Wetlands at 23-27 Summer Street further identified as a cus map 84 block 333 lot9 and map 84 Block 33 3 3/ lot5 the project entails connecting 23-27 Summer Street residences to existing public water supply using directional drilling techniques nicely done Chris thank you very much so do we have the applicant on Zoom uh yes yes ah hello can you please uh state your name for the record and hi I'm Jennifer swe I'm a license site professional with Halen ald and I'm here representing retail business services um we were the former uh owner of the now I think referred to is the uh chelsford Town Center at 20 Boston Road um just to give a little bit of background to why we're here uh back in 2000 there were chlorinated solvents detected in groundwater in the area extensive investigations ensued and um one of the sources was identified as the former dry cleaner that was located at the um Chums Town Center shopping plaza and a building that has since been demolished uh since that time there's been extensive investigations conducted and multiple phases of remediation to treat the source of of that release um of coronated boc's uh in recent um followon investigations associated with this disposal site uh we have identified a residence located at 27 to 29 Summer Street that is still on um that does not have public water supply connected to the resident since they they use a private well and we have tested that uh well water and um did discover the presence of chlorinated voc's in the drinking water thankfully the concentrations are below drinking water standards and it's still safe to drink at this time but but um the long-term remedy that we're looking at to address this situation is to provide public water supply to this home it is the only home within the that was identified within the Disposal Site Area that that is on private water and not on um currently on public water supply and so um um my colleague Stu wey is here he can I'm going let him describe a little bit more what we want to do but in preparation for um to to look at the feasibility of providing public water to this home we looked at different water alignments um and how to get a water line extended there the most feasible option is to come off of an an existing water line that is located at the corner of Brook and summer streets um and so we would we would pass through um uh the home at 27 to 29 is owned by Paul finina he also happens to own the residence on the other side of Beaverbrook which is 23 to 25 Summer Street and so in the process of extending a water line uh we would need to go underneath of Beaver Brook uh and at the same time would upgrade the service to the 23 to 25 because it's currently sort of under um I think there's low water pressure there under sized so that's um sort of the background of why we need to extend this water line and looking to use horizontal directional drilling techniques as um a minimally invasive uh way to do this underneath of the brook uh also should note on this figure that you're showing we did uh engage LEC environmental Wetland scientists to go out in advance of this application to map the resource areas and so those are shown on this figure I think there were only two Wetland um bordering vegetated Wetland Flags which is the orange color uh and then as you can see the um the embankment lines and blue and then the buffer zones extending from that uh off of that location so the work that we're proposing to do would not uh occur within the BBW but would be um below the brook and then in Associated buffer zones um Ste do you want to kind of explain the process for the construction no that was actually a a great overview I don't have a whole lot to add at this point unless unless there's specific questions from the uh members of the committee or anyone else essentially the we did look at where the there's a long history as to why the water lines do not extend to the 2729 property it has to do with the fact that uh well the the brook is there and then also just the history of the development of that area so the the mains were terminated at the end of Brook Street and then there was another one terminated sort of almost at the end of Grove Street and we've looked at both options and the directional drilling to come from Brook Street uh make a connection to the property at 2325 and then go under the brook and then connect 2729 so it's it's really the the intent of the work is to provide public water to a house that currently is on a private it well and yeah that's can you just I can't see the plan very well so it's hard for me to hard for me to speak to it I know that's our plan but I can't see the details otherwise I'd walk through it more but well I yeah I guess I'll go to David and oh there we go yeah David do you uh do you want to just uh give us your uh sure um I've um I've I've been involved with a number of um uh directional drilling projects s um yeah primarily to extend water mains um they they have a very good um track record um you know it's it it is it is quite safe um with respect to potential impacts on um Wetland resource areas um I I I know uh Stu you you you did uh we did talk about um a contingency plan just in case that there is there is some uh some breakout of the um you said you said Bentonite is used um in within within the drill pipe right so so maybe you could talk a little bit about the contingency plan just in case something does go wrong yep no that that's correct we actually did a test boring a a few weeks ago adjacent to Beaver Brook to get a better understanding of the subsurface conditions and one thing that's done in directional drilling is there's a drill fluid that's used both to help cool the drill bit if you will as well as to sort of maintain the Integrity of the bore hole to help prevent the migration of the and the drill fluid is a it's a a banite clay all natural most most of it's just it's just water but obviously we are going to be doing the necessary engineering and design work to ensure that we don't have an impact but there is a contingency plan as we discussed uh yesterday David that we'll we'll we will be put putting we we plan to put together as a matter of course and U yeah so it's this is the the reason this technology is used it's actually used in a lot of urban areas where you don't want to disturb utilities or existing properties it's also used in sensitive areas such as Wetlands for essentially extending utilities where you need them to go and because it is minimally disruptive so I I think this can be a negative termination with with the conditions that um yeah number one uh work closely with a contractor because because a contractor will be hired to do this some someone which I think does really only Directional Drilling and then and then uh uh you know preparation and submission of an I think you called it an inadvertent release mitigation plan um uh and and then um and then Peter I think you a question about dewatering oh yeah um Stu uh I assume that there's a pit at either end that the directional drill is put into and I was just curious if there's what your plan was for any dewatering and specifically any discharge of a trash pump that might be required to dewater nope that that that is correct n don't have we're going to be working with the driller to come up with those details as well as with our Engineers sometime depending on the elevations and the ultimate uh I guess three-dimensional path of the bore we may do sort of a pit launch directional drill but you're right the the drilling fluid will be recirculated come back into the pit and then collected and if we need to we'll have a vac truck on site to collect that we to make sure it's not getting uh indiscriminately discharged yeah thanks that was one half of the question and then I wasn't very clear um might you encounter groundwater in the pit though that you need to dewater and just pump out IR irrespective of the bent Knight yeah I mean I if if we do have groundwater we we will uh similarly do the same thing it'll come back with the drill bit as part of the return uh the beaver BR the bottom of Beaver Brook is approximately 8 feet below ground surface the groundwater B we didn't put in a well recently but there are a couple Wells that were put in by mass d a few years ago I want to say groundwater was at about 15 ft so depending on the the final boring alignment we may there there may be groundwater encounter we may be right at the interface yeah I think I I thought we would be mostly above the water table for the whole pits but obviously the water the pits for sure but the actual the bore path under the brook might I'm sorry thank you thank you I didn't know that term pull pit so yeah that's a pull pit or a Bo pit or a launch pit depending on that yeah those should be above the water table so those should not require dewatering so I don't think so there shouldn't be dewatering groundwater dewatering in terms of but not for the pits yeah no I'm sorry I must have wasn't clear I think I steu I think you told me that the um the pull pits would go down four feet yeah again we're we're working on the final design we our first step was to come before this commission to make sure that you know what we were proposing was reasonably acceptable before we got too far ahead of ourselves with yeah extensive design but that that will that will be coming because we we want to make sure we do this uh yeah and and again not correctly and safely and you okay okay Peter do you have any more questions no I was just thinking of a uh a sediment from a trash pump going all over the neighborhood okay yeah that's that's not that's not going to happen I wouldn't have a job if that happened Bill do you have any questions uh no I'm fine Mark uh did chumford water district give you okay on this is they're okay with the design yep yep we've been in contact with Bruce Canada on several occasions and they've actually provided very specific details in terms of what they want for connections and uh feeds once we run the main the main 2-in line to both the properties we have to get water gates to each of the individual uh units on both the properties and so they've provided what they require they're give me a an estimate for what the fee is going to be to make the connections for us so yeah we've been in touch with them and we we ALS I also just um have been engaging with Trevor Collins um DPW DPW and engineering department to if we need to coordinate with them for sort of the alignment locations as well so and other you know Street opening permits and those kinds of things that we might need okay right Mark anything else did nothing was available on Grove Street or coming down from b r Road same thing on Grove Street the main terminates actually one house in and the issue with coming from that side is there's a I don't know if it's a Bedrock null or uh if it's but there's a very steep uh between those we'd have to cut across a property to get there and you know alternatively we'd have to go all the way around the corner so we did look at this this uh is the more feasible alternative Believe It or Not directional drilling is actually less expensive than open cut trenching yeah I get it okay not that I mean economics are a factor but they're not the main driving Factor practically this okay and especially since since uh Mr finina owns both these properties and his current water line to 2325 is uh apparently way under sized it's don't know when it was installed but it's only 3/4 of an inch so he's been okay fighting with water pressure issues for many years thank you all right Chris any question John do you have any questions I just got one question these pipes are going to be sleeved no essentially what they do is they bore a hole yeah go all the way through to where they want come up out of the ground then they hook up and actually pull a a 2in diameter probably likely be an hdp pipe back through it and that becomes the the the water M quote unquote but the water man is not going to be sleeved no it's just it's a direct buried uh direct buried uh 2in uh hdp pipe okay but that's not our that's not our call okay good question but well I know for a fact on certain runs the cheler water department wants a sleeved service yeah no I think CH cheler water district I mean if they want something different we can certainly discuss that with them but they actually were the ones who told us they wanted a 2in 2in line so I can obviously we'll finalize those details with that's what they do for a living yeah good question okay all right yeah we we'll finalize those details make we need to make sure that we comply with what the Chumps water district wants and what they've told me is that they want a 2 in uh okay two in line with thank you very much so David um that means we are okay with this you you said you you'll be working closely with the uh contractor and and with these folks y so so I I I recommend a negative determination and just with the conditions to you know work closely with a contractor I can can put in something about the um the the mitigation plan and and the dewatering as well but that's that's all going to be in whatever final plan that um and you get to review that yes yep okay so this is an open meeting public meeting so there any questions from the public anyone have any comments or concerns I don't see anybody coming up so I move that we close the public hearing thank you Chris motion from Chris second from Mark all in favor closing the hearing meetings the hearing is closed I move that we approve um this um matter with a negative two determination two and three two and three with the special conditions that the um that the contractor works very closely with our agent on this matter and also that we have uh prepared and submitted an inadvertent release mitigation plan to our agent prior to the work beginning and any other special conditions and then just the dewatering plan as well but as I say that's all going to be in you know the final plans that okay yeah that Halen Aldridge and the contractor come up with but you know it doesn't hurt to have a little bit of redundancy yeah so add again the condition of a deing plan as well being submitted in the final plans to our agent so move okay motion from Chris with those conditions second from Mark I see a hand raised from Mark so all in favor I I I okay thank you very much appreciate your your uh your presentation tonight very nice thank you see good to see that Resident is going to get uh both an upgrade in the the one house and uh they they'll like that and then having a cleaner water it's amazing to find a house expected that there's a house in town that doesn't have private residen to I would have never expected that that wasn't a main in that in that area yeah yeah that's just a loop yeah just have a loop okay all right thank you gentlemen good night have a good evening hip thank you okay next up is uh the uh hearing for 10 Hildreth Street and I believe we are being requested to continue request for a certificate of compliance um so we weren't planning on having any discussion about that okay so need a need a motion to May to May 14th I move that we continue um 10 Hilder Street matter to our next meeting of May 14 motion from Chris to continue second from second second from Bill all in favor to continue I motion passes unanimous um we'll see ten hildr on May 14th okay next one is 270 Bill Rec world this is a request from amended order of conditions continued from actually this is November but it's yes from that's our last meeting so um I will say up front um I would like to keep our discussions for this one the next one which is 191 and the last one3 no more than 30 minutes I'd be very happy if they weren't 30 minutes but I'd like to try to do that we're at 7:50 um um so um that goes for all of us at the commission as well as uh anyone in the public and in the uh on the applicant side so um yeah we don't have to read a notice on this one so hello Casey good evening good evening to the commission Casey Ferrera with Howard Stein Hudson so the last meeting we uh left off with we had some peer review comments to take care of um what we stated back to you guys was that we did not have any issues um or objections to any of the peer riew uh from myself as it uh relates to storm water and then Ed as it relates to uh the ram plan uh what we've done is we've provided responses back on how we will address each item uh we have not yet address the items um I have said in my response is honor before May 1st you guys will have an updated plan uh omm long-term pollution prevention plan from from myself um and it will address every comment that was on that peer OFW you um again the response letter that I have tells you how I'm going to address them all um but that is basically the storm water update that we have um I don't know if Ed has anything that he wants to come up and say um Ed Weagle um R Associates licens like professional um I just took a look at at um BET's letter and and there there were two comments that they had um where they were seeking for some additional information so I just wanted to say that we have um we have revised our Ram plan and and we'll provide that to you um in the next few days uh I do want to incorporate um the additional comments that uh Rob Smith had on um on two of the items um in his letter here um you know just to note that uh the first one was with respect to the septic system um currently we're not planning on Excavating the septic system but what we can do is in the ramp plan we can include some language that says you know should that changed the septic system would be managed separately from everything else um and and handled offsite um also um there was sorry what do you mean by off-site handled uh if if we need to dig up the septic system we're we're not we're not going to bury it back on site we're going to take it away I'm I'm sorry yeah okay okay um the other issue was with respect to um you know basically keeping equipment clean in construction um and I think you know we can certainly add some details um you know about you know procedures for making sure that you know um equipment you know doesn't get excessively dirty or or otherwise cross-contaminate um areas um where we think it's potentially contaminated from those areas where we don't think it's contaminated okay so I don't know if the commission had some questions on that yeah uh John do you have any questions I have no questions Peter rob is here tonight if anyone does have questions thank you okay right rob you are there yes I'm here okay good actually I should start with David do you have anything to add uh um no no uh I don't um again I I I think you know ultimately we need uh a final letter from Rob you know saying under each one of the issues resolved resolved resolved you know so I think I think we can go ahead and start working on the draft order of conditions but I I think that um the hearing should be kept open and until we have you know the final versions of the S the sgmp and RAM plant because what I I mean one one one of the things I've Incorporated in the order conditions is that they're actually going to be part of the order of conditions got it okay and those are substantial pieces of work and it's a 21-day clock right so we want to make sure we have those or yes okay okay understood Peter any anything yeah uh first of all thank you to the two LSPs for working together and helping us and I just had one question and Rob it was sort of aimed for you and I think you may have answered it or David's comments addressed it but I would just wanted at some point Rob to hear from you that you were comfortable that your concerns had been fully addressed I mean I read through your letter you wrote thank you for that but I kind of wanted to you know be sure that you representing the town's interest we're comfortable uh that this will be protective of of the public and all of our values so yeah I think um you know I think with those revisions you know I had sort of there was maybe nine comments and we've closed most of those I think we've made good progress um you know provided just a few more follow-ups and no I do I do think that uh you know following these U these these last uh you know few recommendations to add to that plan I think that will be protective uh to the town and to the you know to the resource area okay all right and and Carl just one other quick thing and apologies because I never brought this up before but I assume that our plan includes some Provisions for avoiding soil being tracked out of the site by trucks that's standard AO conditions yeah so I assume that somebody has thought about that it's construction entrance well they don't all they don't everything we do they don't all work very well in town that have been built in the last year okay so so David I'll defer to you in a standard condition but you know given given how visible that site is the last thing we want is to do all this good work and then have the public see a bunch of dirt on the road yeah I mean that I mean there's a couple of ways that can be handled um I think this this project does require a Swip and that will probably be addressed in the Swip good thank you I think Casey wants to say something uh just a quick note to add to that too the site is right across the street from where DPW exits every day so they'll kind of be on top of us so that should be addressed as part of Point uh the everyday construction good point yeah okay great anything else Peter oh no I'm good yeah thank you Bill uh at the last meeting somebody mentioned uh an additional well the possibility of additional Wells on the property adjacent to Bara Road has that been discussed has that been talked about if they're required or necessary um at I think um at the last meeting we talked about um uh Mass D and their involvement um with this particular case and in particular um one of the properties um across the road at 279 um I went on to their website um this afternoon uh before this hearing tonight and I took a look to see if D had um entered any more information uh into any of the files either ours or 3M or electrom Metals I didn't see anything additional um I know D has um requested that 3M uh do a groundwater study um but um as of this afternoon I didn't see anything um on uh in dp's electronic files indicating that that had started so it's going to be the decision not ours yeah correct it's it's up to D okay that's fine that's the only thing I had okay thanks thanks Bill well those are my thoughts I was going to suggest D too I didn't know what you already did the file work let's just move this thing forward I'm all getting it going okay Chris yeah I mean I think we made great progress and I mean as far as I'm concerned it sounds like we need based on our agents recommendation one more time to come back to our next meeting but he's going to work on some draft order conditions for us to review then and I'm I'm expecting we're going to close this heing when we come back next time okay and and I expect to have um a final um RAM and soil and groundwater management plan that addresses all these comments and the including the two um that we're lingering tonight um by the end of the week or early next week good yeah because I think you know we can just kind of you know you know we've made great progress but I think we can probably close this one up and our next meeting be done you know again a lot of good work to get us where we are now y okay so so um I I do have a draft here although doesn't say draft on it it should but uh I've I've highlighted in yellow the the conditions that I think are are really special to this particular project so um in in thinking about this myself and speaking to uh other people and and speaking with Rob so uh first one is under design and pre-construct construction requirements so uh I've in Ed this condition number 26 prior to the start of any site work uh for example Earth disturbance clearing of vegetation Etc including demolition SL removal of existing structures the applicant shall submit to the Conservation Commission a plan call it the existing the existing contamination plan for use by the applicant's contractors contractor contractor showing and lay layout and profile views the location extent and depth of detected or presume soil contamination the existing condition the existing contamination plan shall also show groundwater elevations so I I think the motivation for this is again I've had a a number of people say to me and I think Rob agrees it's a legitimate concern you know how does the contractor know you know uh where where the contaminated soil is you know where the contaminated groundwater is I I think I think a plant is really needed that the contractor can use the contractor just by taking a relatively quick look at before they even start any digging got it so they so they they can know where the contaminated soil is you know where the groundwater elevations are and um and and and I and I think we sort of need that in 3D to the extent the maximum extent possible that's why I say um you know location extent and uh you know depth in in in both layout and profile views okay okay um Ju Just to respond to that David um the the revised plan that I've I've um pulled together um includes um a table of all the elevations of all the structures relative to where we think this potentially contaminated soil zone is and indicating you know both the ele the absolute elevation based on the plan datm uh and approximate depth below grade um I've also included um two figures which are um Howard Stein Hudson's um two utility plans and on those U plans what I've done is I've highlighted in yellow the structures and the um the lines that are going to um likely impinge on this potentially contaminated soil horizon so there is um a very good plan um you know depicting where we think the contractor is going to encounter this material and also there's a a comprehensive set of two tables um one showing structures the other one's showing drain lines um you know indicating relative to um absolute elevation where the the contaminated zone is likely to be found okay I mean that sounds good but you know contractors don't really look at tables very much they look at plans that's why I have a plan so okay that's that's what we need and it's a highlighted plan okay um but it is going to be important that they keep an eye on their depths because that's the only way to find this stuff is to keep to keep track of depths yeah but but but which I'm sure they'll do but they'll have to have something to you know check that against and it have to be something that they can look at and see easily while they're working out in the field and and again those are HSA um utility plans so they're pretty comprehensive plans okay okay da you got more uh yep so we already talked about this a little bit um so under construction management the soil and groundwater management plan and remedial abatement measure plan ASG MP and RAM plan copies of which are attached here to as exhibit a and exhibit B that's why we need the final copies because they're actually going to be you know attach as part of the order of conditions uh are Incorporated here in by reference to this order of conditions anywhere the sgmp and RAM plans may and and a ram plan May conflict with other requirements this order of conditions this order supersedes I can I can modify that that language that last s slightly to um make it a little bit clearer I mean I really don't think there going to be any places where they conflict but you know just just for the sake of thoroughness um have have that in there uh and then condition 33 we've talked a little bit about this already pursuing to the provisions of Mass general laws chapter 44 section 53g the Conservation Commission May hire an outside consultant or Consultants at the app applicant's expense to monitor compliance with the order of conditions I think the applicant has already said a number of times he's willing to do that but you know still the commission has that legal Authority and could I suggest if the commission wants to go ahead with this perhaps we can get a draft scope of work and get you know figure out what's really required ahead of construction so there's no last minute um well I don't I don't think we need that to close the hearing issue no I'm just saying going forward yes yeah yeah I mean I I think I think again we're they're going to have to have a Contractor on board you know and we we'll have to be you know talking to them before before a scope can actually be drafted fair enough so um so that's construction management now moving down um you see invasive species manager Rimer this is an amended order of conditions and and in the original there was a whole bunch of stuff about invasive species man management that should stay in here um but but anyway so going under now going down in Perpetual conditions um I I I think some of this can um Can is probably most of it's pretty General and and can be applied to um other other uh projects with um you know stor storm water um compliance and and and and I've Incorporated them in a couple the other ones we're talking about at night this tonight this one this one is not quite as general because as you recall um infiltration has been eliminated so so there there were a number of conditions that originally were in there that pertained to infiltration that um I I then uh that I I removed once infiltration was eliminated so I I'll I can just read these out if you want me to the long-term pollution prevention plan storm water management system operations and maintenance plan LT PPP and onm plan respectively in appendix a of the sub supplemental data re report a copy of which is attached here to as exhibit D you know again I that's why I wanted the final version of the the ltp pp and onm plans to actually again make a part of the order conditions are Incorporated here by reference to this order of conditions again anywhere the ltpp and know M plan May conflict with explicit requirements on pages 10 a to 10h this order conditions the explicit requirements who proed um David do you need to read through the whole thing uh that's up to you I'm not sure I don't no I don't need to what what I was planning to do was then you know continue the hearing tonight I'll Ma I'll email out this draft to commission members and then you can um come back with comments and you've got the key ones highlighted in yellow yes is a fairly standard okay unless somebody objects I think it might be good to also make sure we get that to the applicant too so they can work it over as well I think that'll help us you be in better position to close the next meeting perfect yeah and if you guys get that we get it from David and we see comments send them to David only let him incorporate your comments and then we'll get the final copy before the next meeting that make sense yep Y and we need him to David to get us our comments or anyone's comments how how much time you need so that we can close the next me three weeks before our next yeah we have three weeks it it would be nice if you could you know at the very latest a week in advance because once the hearing is closed still have 21 days to actually get the final order out right so I I would say you know if possible um no uh less than a week I just want to give you plenty of time yeah and it's imperative for you guys to get all your information to him so we can wrap things up absolutely okay and then of course they need to get us the additional information you know the final versions of the the two so I think that's pretty much everything for this particular so to summarize here the um actions for the next meeting obviously is in the meantime we'll have this o OC cycle um review cycle and we got to get these plans from um from Ed and from from Casey what else are the deliverables that we need what what else are we looking for is there anything else that we're looking for we're going to get the clean letters from the peer review based on the revised thank you well so um so this this plan but I'm again calling these this in contamination plan um that that says uh PRI prior to um the uh the start of uh any site work so but it sounds like you can get me something much sooner than that yeah and we can run by you what we have now and we can discuss if there's any changes you want to that but if it's prior to construction we can certainly finalize it way ahead of that but yeah okay I'd say we should start working on that sooner than later so we can discuss with you okay what we have sounds good so Carl there was there's one other technical issue I hate to throw on the table we talked about this before and perhaps fellow Commissioners can think about this and Casey I don't know if you tackled this issue in your revised onm plan um but at least in my mind there's this question about posos on the site I know we're all tired of talking about that but basically what we're doing is running pipes through contaminated groundwater I think although you might want to correct me maybe they're not really in the groundwater maybe that's the question but the broader question is if there's leaks in any of the storm water collection pipes and if those pipes are in posos contaminated groundwater does my question is does the commission want to think about what happens if the piping system creates a pathway for contaminated groundwater that normally percolate through the site but under this condition under leaking pipe scenario leaking manhole accelerating it it could be going straight through the system and turning into a direct discharge to a Zone 2 okay and we could talk about that during permit conditions a simple sampling or tightness testing or Rob Smith and Ed probably have some suggestions but rather than discuss it we could put keep that on the table well the permit conditions I mean it you know during during the course of this hearing over the past you know what almost a year I guess I mean it has been mentioned a number of times uh a potential condition to require sampling you know at the the discharge Outlets yeah and I um is that something that you I mean I think it depends on how the commission feels about that and how important that is but again the risk is pretty high if you're creating a potential direct pathway we can talk about that as well but but but I think if that's something you want I mean you can certainly want you can certainly put that in you know your comments um I I think I think when when the um like the focal points I think you're probably referring to the focal points right yeah and and Rob Smith had some comments about this a couple of months ago let's let's not get into it now but I think we've got some other expertise ideas well then I'll leave it up to you you know how much you want to press this yeah yeah I mean we're trying to whittle It Down To What We let's not do it now I just want to put that on the table so people are not surprised but let's yeah but that's that's that's the type of thing let's let's get that input into our agent yep and that way and then our agent's going to be able to you know share everything with the applicant here we can kind of get this all resolved and then we're in position to close yeah that that that input has happened a number of times Chris and there's been no I think it's great did you bring up these questions but I think it should be up to the applicant to remedy them without us getting involved in discussing them we bring them up great points the applicant has been asked and nothing well you're revising the onm plan so you have a chance to put something in it well I guess there's a question as to what exactly would we test for at the outfalls because it' be difficult to separate out what if we're testing after rainfall rain can contain p in itself so if we're testing and everything's testing positive we don't know that that's coming from Leech and groundwater or if that's just coming from the rain that fell on the site well that's simple if it's if it's background then it's not a concern well I mean it's a concern but not for this project right but and that would be I guess a question better suited for Ed and Rob but to me I don't know how to differentiate the the two between testing I don't think you have to okay the question is is the storm water system creating a direct pathway of posos and if it's all mashed together in a background issue and you can't separate the two I don't want to turn it into a science project okay let's um and do you you have a quick quick response here yeah I just want to quickly respond to that um most of the storm water infrastructure is above the high water table but you know some of it is um I think you know to the extent you have groundwater with past in it leaking into the storm water system and then getting into the brook um isn't really that what we want because that takes the Pas out of the groundwater and puts it into the surface water where it then can run out the river and into the Boston Harbor no because it all infiltrates in the wetlands you know that well it's it's already in the ground already um you know so if it's in the ground and it migrates through the ground or it comes up into the stream and then goes back into the ground isn't that essentially the same yeah and I think we weren't going to discuss it now but there is a lot of things that you can do you could do some simple tight testing of the system after you build it you could do some simple grab samples of the discharge of the storm water system during a storm with a background sample AR rain so you don't create a problem for yourselves none of that cost very much money so I'll let I'll let the applicant look at couple options I think you hear Peter's concern and we can talk about that at our at our next sure session so I think we've got draft o OC from David we'll review that the the the final RAM and and uh soil and groundwater management plan from Ed and the letters from the peer reviews clean RIT letters from the peer reviews the existing contamination plan draft uh so I think anything else am I missing anything don't believe so okay so take a motion to continue the hearing for I move that we continue this hearing till May 14 okay motion from Chris second from John all in favor I hi Mark yeah I okay thanks thanks very much appreciate it next one we are at this is a noi this is continued from our last meeting ZK Holdings LP 191 chelwood Street we have a familiar face representing the applicant pre complier all right so um the last time we were here we had some brief discussions about the omm plan what we had was we had submitted it shortly before the meeting um there was not enough time for the commission to review it um ahead of that meeting um so we have continued to today we did receive additional input um last Friday um to which I have uh well with that additional input um we set up a meeting with David which happened this afternoon um we met David we discussed how we would adjust the um long-term PL pren plan and the onm plan to address the the comments that Peter had um I believe all but two of them um we did address um and I can go through why I didn't address the other two if you'd like um well the first of which being one request was that we stake out the 50-ft buffer zone from the Wetland um and call out that no snow may be stored beyond that 50t the majority of the 50 fot is behind uh the guard rail that goes around the rear of the site um so what I did was I added in the long-term pollution prevention plan that the there is no snow storage to be had beyond that guard rail so some of that guard rail is further than 50 feet um but in order to get to the 50 Foot you basically have to go up over the guard rail and then dump the snow which isn't really realistic so what we said was just don't store it beyond that guard rail um that should take care of that concern as well um and then we left in the language also do not store within the 50 Foot so it's basically a catchall for both um and then the second one was a concern about if the subservice system is not draining um the onm plan calls for it to be dewatered for review um to check what it is and that dewatering is basically a pump and then you pump it through the outlet pipe um so that we can get the system down to its bones and see what's wrong with it um there was a a comment from Peter that we do not want to discharge it directly to the Wetland um the standard practice of it would be to discharge it it's already clean water it's fully treated ready for infiltration so what we want to do is we want to get that water out of the the system so that we can review it um so we'd like to remain the the ability to do that and discharge that water um it's again it's clean water fully treated ready for infiltration so the water would be going to the aquifer in one way or another um if it were to be infiltrating as it should be um so what we want to do is be able to get rid of that water so we can actually review the system every other comment we took care of um and I submitted a revised plan to uh David this afternoon okay oh I will also um say another request we had leaving the last meeting was to meet with the water district I did meet with the water district I met with brandan this afternoon um and I also emailed along uh to David email correspondents that he does not as long as the site is tied into town sewer their concerns are addressed so there's that okay we got that leate I saw you sent it out to us late yeah yes so um I don't know Peter do you do you want to I mean this is going to be continued anyway I think so do you want to take some time to review well the revisions Casey has made yeah I mean I think we're pretty close I have a couple of questions I think the biggest one is uh the recent letter from chord water district I don't know if you've had a chance to to speak with the district but no not yet uh and Casey I saw the correspondence you were trying to seek some clarification but as I understand the letter or email from chelsford Waters they were concerned that all waste water would be no so contained did you get a clarification of that yeah so actually it was that my email was intended to be a summary of what we discussed in in person this afternoon I asked him if we could put it in writing just so I would be able to submit it he said if it wasn't um tied into sewer then they would have concerns because the entire facility and all Wastewater is tied into sewer um then his concerns are um addressed so I asked for that clarification and then he responded with I think quote uh correct that is that would be the main concern so my clarification line was basically can you confirm that your concern is to ensure that this the site is tied into sewer and his was correct right but I guess David maybe you can help us after the meeting here my question is does chumford water district realize that the storm drains at the end of the car wash and I presume there's some at the beginning of the car wash I haven't looked at that uh under certain busy conditions there could be some tra back out of I discussed Car Wash chemicals that go into that stor drain so it's not accurate to say all waste waterer from the site goes to the Sewer the way I would Express it is almost all of it there is that question of the trace amount of chemicals and my question is whether the water district understands that and they're willing to accept that risk in which case we should be fine so that's really the so that we had that discussion and he asked about that catch basing and the discussion was essentially that okay the very final rinse of it was clean water and he said then I I'm not I don't have any concern I talk to about that okay I guess the question I had were they were they going to be in the loop on an OM and M so yep so one of the conditions that he requested that I forwarded in my email was that they just asked that a condition of the approval be that the omm get submitted to the water district as well okay okay water to Health in water I don't think asked for Board of Health specifically just for water I guess I'm asking at the board of he just a packet whatever be yeah I mean my anticipation is that as part of our Board of Health processes they will also be submitted the the operation maintenance plan but we can certainly make it a condition of approval that we submit it to the Board of Health as well I'd like to see yeah and I think you raised the other point I don't know if we would make it a condition of our work or not but the storm water system is protective of the aquafer as long as you don't have a chemical spill in the parking lot that washes into the storm drain and the Department of Health as you guys know has a regulation that I looked at and I thought it was pretty good about not spilling stuff right so we should you know rely on that rag because that's not our rag but that is a critical part of keeping the stuff out of the groundwater which is our job so I again I don't know if we issue a permit that says contingent on Board of Health reviewing that but you know that's more speaks to the town internal process right okay so I'm not quite sure here are we recommending that we continue this is that what I'm hearing I'm going to make a motion that we close tonight's here I've got the information that I've kind of it's kind of what I thought I thought we were going D I thought I thought we were so close last meeting yeah I'm personally okay with that yeah okay okay and then the same model permit conditions and we all comment y well yeah but but then then then I would heard the hearing be kept open because then if you close it tonight we won't we won't be meeting again until the deadline for well of course there is an onm plan revision that you you said you aiming for May 1 Casey no that's 270 this one mixed up again don't I this one I submitted today I can't keep this straight that's okay can you guys or is it just me it's not Peter well so Carl what's your point can I would like an opportunity to look at the permit conditions I don't want to make it a big deal but I would like to read them why can't we do that and I to David's point we have a 21-day clock and and our next meeting is until 21 days so we would close it really needs it really needs to be kept open if you want to review then I think I I think we need to keep it open until but it can be a I think it can be a very quick um um well I'm going to make my motion put it to a vote because this has gone on for so long this is um and you know we still want you know our agent will come up with conditions for us to vote on at our next meeting and we'll have to vote that night um well I'm confused are we still giving comments to David to put in the conditions oh David's saying no at this point I mean it's uh really right David okay um I I I can I can email a draft um and you know PE people can certainly uh email me their comments but it starts to get a little bit tight you know because um you know uh I have other things that I'm working on and it's and it's just much much easier to not have the pressure of a statutory deadline right you know there right um well I mean my attitude is we're pretty much done but the conditions capture everything we've talked about the last few months seems logical to me to take a final look not to create new issues but to be sure the concerns we discussed already you know I think as I as I told Casey this afternoon if it if it's kept open for another three weeks you know at that point you know I can have it ready in just a couple of days probably so it will be essentially you know ready to go at that point but at the end of the day doesn't make a huge difference to me is if you're okay with me you know drafting an order and then you know you know you're going to be okay with that you know with the draft so have a motion in second well I don't think you finished the motion and we have a public uh a public comment uh so why don't we go to public comment Lauri Meers 7 Pine just a quick question I know it was um mentioned in the email that you had sent me David about the uh no liquids from a spill being in the dumpster what about the materials used to clean up the liquids would those be stand stored in dump or disposed in the dumpster uh David do you have an answer or should we ask Casey or well you can ask Casey I assume that'll be in the employee handbook um which there is an explicit the email specifically says that no liquid so if if there's a spill with the you know the absorbent materials be disposed of in the dumpster and my concern last time was dumpsters are not waterproof right right got it certainly put an explicit condition prohibiting that okay yeah I would that's an example of why I think it we got to look at these conditions well right just just so uh we can get Casey can you just come up and and officially nod on the record or something like that I'm seeing you nod but um yeah so um generally what's going to happen is if there's an internal spill it's going to be washed into the sewer if if able um there or you're going to use some kind of I don't know what the correct term is but like a a material to absorb all that liquid and solidify it once it is solidified and no longer liquid it would then be disposed of properly whether that's the dumpster if that's allowed by Federal Regulation or however the Federal Regulations would dictate that and that would be as part of the employee handbook as well I think I think it's important to point out that some of the material data sheets talk about don't spill this stuff on pavement okay I mean this is I mean I mean I'm sorry we're not I don't want to go on a big tangent but these are not the chemicals yeah we all think of it that way but they're not they're highly concentrated industrial chemicals with a bunch of stuff hazardous to humans according to the data sheets okay that's all okay now I hear uh I'll make a motion and we close this public hearing okay motion from Chris second from Mark all in favor I I motion passes for uh you voted yes yeah we can make all right five to one uh opposed I I didn't oh okay it's okay so Mo motion passes we close the hearing um any other motion here I don't think we need another motion right David uh you have to make a motion to issue the order of conditions well no you you well we'll we'll do that at our next meeting yeah you you could I mean that's again that's right at the deadline it would it would be better to approve that motion agreed um so wait a minute make sure we all understand this cuz because our next meeting is not a public he three weeks three weeks I'm sorry our next hearing meeting is three weeks so that you're I was saying that so what we're maybe not thinking about is the 21-day rule we have to issue the per the conditions in 21 days unless the applicant agrees to a waiver you know yeah we can make it work okay well well but it it would have it would have to be at the latest it would have to be issued on the 21st would have to be issued before our next right and was your concern your workload or us getting back to you um you know uh a little bit of both um I mean if if if if if uh I get comments then I have questions and then then there's a lot of back and forth with a commission member or members you know again that that that adds that adds time um I I think um you know maybe may maybe if tomorrow you know member instead memb just send me there their recommendations for conditions like the one we just talked about maybe an explicit prohibition against you know putting any any you know clean up materials in the dumpster that makes it a little bit easier yeah Chris I think the challenge is scooping up all of these little things that we've talked about the last six months like the concern about stuff in the dumpster I'm off the top my head I don't know how many of those little concerns there are but there was one I think we can make it work okay okay it'd be as simple as having the person that cleans up the company take the material with them yeah so so let's let's ask David a dumpster yeah but you want it in the permit but we're not going to talk about the detail yeah it's got to be in the permit so so David you have you've uh you've shared a draft we we just need to get comments back to you Pronto yes okay so that's that's the direction from to the commission get comments to David this week latest if not tomorrow yeah so that he has a chance to to get this done and and just keeping in mind there won't be another opportunity to discuss this at a meeting right before it has to be issued okay and forgive me David you shared the draft permit already um I haven't I haven't sent it out on screen but but I'll do that thank you okay okay so do we take a a motion we're good we're good for now the hearing's closed but you also have to vote to issue an order of conditions and that has to be tonight really yeah that we could just close the hearing and then we had 21 days to but the but yes yes there is but the 21 days doesn't fall within the next before the next meeting oh the 14th right yes all right then I make um motion that we issue um uh an order of conditions uh subject to the uh special conditions that our agent's going to be drafting up motion from Chris second from John all in favor I I I motion passes excellent thank you all thanks thank you Casey great thanks Chris thanks for working through that okay thank you good night night Casey thank you uh next one uh we are at notice of intent uh contined from our last meeting this is 93 brick Hill Road and we have Brian and crew are here so again uh we're we're doing well here time wise it's 8:30 so uh we are looking at uh issues we um reviewing the draft special conditions David you were also drafting the order of conditions on this one yes we hit I don't think we've seen that yet have we uh no okay um I I think uh again assuming um you know the the overlap with the storm water requirements um the overlap with this and the and the other two um I I think I think most most of these conditions deal with the the turtle nesting Management Area um and also there's there's a couple regarding snow storage um so uh we can we can review those um so I there shouldn't there shouldn't be any surprises here so uh condition 30 uh the nesting management area area shall uh be constructed during the initial buildout phase of the project again I think we've already talked about that and yep that's not a problem um and then uh Rel ated prior to the start of any site work the the wildlife biologist overseeing instruction of the nma shall work with the applicants contractor to prepare and submit to the conservation agent for review a detailed chronological Works sequence for construction of the nesting Management Area um which which really implies implies there um that um it it protects you know the nesting Management Area um I I know that a turtle protection plan has uh already been submitted um and you know that that will be referenced in this as well oh yes next one is uh the turtle protection plan a copy of which is attached here to as exhibit a is incorporated here here in by reference to this order of conditions [Music] um then um again under construction management this is all pretty pretty much standard um but uh getting getting down to Perpetual conditions again this is pretty much standard under the turtle nesting management area again um uh the certificate of compliance should not be issued prior to the end of year five of the initial 5year period for annual evaluations of exist site conditions within the nma see note six on sheet one of the turtle habitat mitigation plan and the Wetland scientist over seeing treatment and monitoring uh certifies and writing no that's that should not be there uh that that last sentence is uh that's an error I'll take that out um so you got to do a little more editing yeah I got to do a little bit more eding editing uh the nesting Management Area shall be managed as such in perpetuity um so so that's just what it says after the end of year five the of the initial five-year period for annual evaluations of existing site conditions with the nma reporting of management activities in the nma shall be done on an annual basis by the end of the calendar I'm sorry who are the reports go to is it to you the agent uh yes yes that that that uh whatever you're called in 100 years okay um and then and then and then and then we had this one as well um that said proposed use of non-organic herbicides in the nma shall require prior prior approval by the Conservation Commission as part of an invasive management plan for the nma um and then and then here uh next one is Conservation Commission and its agents May with reasonable notice and the commission's own Financial expense enter the nesting management area for purposes including but not limited to monitoring nesting activity documenting species present and evaluating habitat management so um I I think that that's something the commission should seriously consider um you know just just as a record of you know the long-term success of the nesting Management Area you know especially if the commission wants to try that and a um another uh location you know on another project um so that's that's that one then and then there was the with regard to the um the snow storage I think this actually is in the plans a full build buildout signs at least you know I just left I wasn't sure exactly sure of the dimensions here maybe Brian you can make make a suggestion signs at least X by y displaying snow storage on pavement only shall be posted in the four location shown on sheet four of the plan so I guess I guess you know impli implied in this condition is that snow storage will be allowed only on pavment only and I don't think that's what's currently being proposed right um so that's uh for the record BR T associate so for the snow storage area behind the building it Zone pavement only uh in areas outside of buffer zone towards the front of the property they are in landscaped areas and in terms of sign sizing um 11 by 17 I would say no bigger than that and likely we could probably do something smaller because it would be indicating snow storage you know with arrows essentially um but but it's something that the contractors will have to be able to read while they're actually doing the plowing right I think 11 by 17 is large enough to be able to read from the trucks what members sounds reasonable okay I will uh yeah I will put that on the uh insert those Dimensions into the okay so David you're going to get this is there anything on there that we saw so far that we're okay with objecting to but we still want to look at this but uh you're making a proposal here yes so so again I think it's sort of the same question you know keep keep the hearing open y um or not you know again there's going to be the same statutory issues you know with regard to the 21 days yeah we got usually we're two weeks between meetings this time we happen to be three weeks between so made it a little tighter yeah which is why I think we've already put them in a little bit of a bind with the other one I don't know that I want to do that for two of them if it was two weeks I'd be little more like yeah okay be a huge help to me to keep this open it's not that often we have this many big proi come at the same time we kind of get the crunch all kind of came down and then we have this stretch of time so then it all comes down to him I know but I think I think we're we're right here on this this this yeah I'm I'm not hearing any you know contentious comment on this one um was there I have a note here also on water district did was there a meeting with Brandon on this one as well or do I have that mixed up I think Brandon and Lisa were both out in the site walk for this if I remember correctly so John Higgins Higgins environmental for the record yeah we met with Brandon and he issued a letter from the water district that folks should have a copy went to the Board of Health and we had a Board of Health meeting I don't think I saw that I do have a copy I can we can take one out for you now if you want how far back was that no no it wasn't a couple weeks ago it was the last Board of Health meeting yeah yeah it was before the last meeting it just hadn't with here but it just hadn't been given to you yet well I okay but I I guess I I have a note here that you were going to meet with Brandon on this yeah I was going to put that in my report oh okay okay I'm I'm sorry you you want a letter from the applicant you want a letter from the both from the water it's from Brandon yeah and actually it's signed by Ender yeah well well my my recollection which may not be accurate so uh is uh you you did a site walk with the water district and they wrote a memo then after that I think a member of the public or some other entity or one of us raised the question will the storm water infiltration change the hydrology and I know we had some discussion I thought that the planning board then do I have these up I thought the plany board then asked for a peer review I to answer that question yes isn't that right if I could so finish I'm sorry shut up so my thought was my question was did charford water understand that there was that question and supposedly that question is being resolved with a peer review so I don't know if that means it's our job to be sure chelsford water is up to date or if that's planning board's job but so if I could clarified if I got something wrong there all right so so the time coming is I had a meeting with Brandon and Lisa and they you know we met we talked you know they confirmed that it was connected to town sewer which is important and they issued a letter uh like the following week but that was that was signed by Ender returned to Brandon for Signature prior to the last planning board meeting that I mean the the last Conservation Commission meeting we had it just hadn't been received by the planning board and I think David actually continued the meeting in order to receive that letter although it was internal Town letter so and then then the following week or whatever it was we met with the planning board so this is after Brandon and Lisa our field meeting and the issuance of a letter by the water district and signed by both Ender and Brandon as as just making sure that we were connected to town sewer and right I got that part but I guess for this board if if it's correct that the planning board is taking a fresh look at this to me that's one town entity taking a hard look at it and we don't need to do that is that the right perspective you know I just wanted to add that it was the the the letter from Brandon preceded the planning board meeting right okay so it wasn't like they they did didn't they wanted to like reflect on Brandon before oh I'm sorry no I didn't that's the timeline part I'm sorry did that's it did I imply that I'm sorry no you said the other that that they hadn't been issued yet so but it had been yeah but the point is there's another step in aquafer protection I believe is the responsibility of the planning board when they take this up yeah at their next meeting so I mean we don't want to do a redundant right thing okay so what are we looking at so I think we're looking to continue this one um to our next meeting in May 14th and then we'll we'll be able to to close the hearing on May 14th and be able to vote on an order of conditions that night and right it all up I think that's I think we're in good shape for that yeah uh so if I could the only request I believe is if we could have a copy of the draft order I think Rich had asked for that earlier today or yesterday uh yes S I didn't have a chance to get back to him okay but but I'll but I'll certainly em email that you and him as well so the we will we will get a copy of and you'll get a copy to the app we have to vote he's going to give it put it to a vote yeah okay so I made the motion uh who's the second Mark yeah Chris made the motion to continue to the May 14 14th of May Mark second did it all in favor I I I okay great thank you all appreciate it we're going to get there we are going to get there thank you and now we have working hard uh Mass Electric uh is it actually Mass Electric or is it national grid is that the same same company yeah okay National Grid goes by a number of aliases 15 conquered Road this continued from May uh a April 9th with have Ken conoz uh VHB is representing the applicant um we were awaiting uh the peer review yes and and I and I did this afternoon I did get a um a proposal from uh CI which I AP olizee I just do not have a chance to send out to the commission um but uh but I will I that is it a reasonable uh yes uh I think it is um I so going back on this one this is where um the scope of this would be reviewing the Wetland uh BBW boundary performance standard res for the resources so here here it is up on the screen CI proposes to provide the following peer review Services review of the notice of intent application all supporting material submitted for the the site um review the gis permitting plan submitted with the noi U prepared by VHB and permitting package plan set dated January 18 2024 site visit C CI will conduct one visit to the site to review conditions in comparison to the site plans reference above and to review the Wetland delineation presented in the noi CI assumes the applicant will have the Wetland boundary marked with numbered flagging that corresponds to the numbering shown on the above reference site plan CI assumes that the applicant Wetland consultant will be present at the site visit to discuss and confirm any required changes to the Wetland boundary if necessary these changes will be marked at the site with new Wetland flagging for later field location and Associated revisions to the noi plans following the applicant submitt of a revised plan showing the updated Wetland boundary CI will provide a review of the plan for concurrence with the field revisions and provide followup needed by phone and our email Communications with the Conservation Commission and its agent um thought there would be something in there about compliance with the performance standards uh it looks to me like all they've included in there is review of the Wetland delineation well it does talk about compliance with our Wetlands the wetlands Act and the bylaw down there in the letter which includes the performance standards doesn't it yeah maybe just clarify it write down you see that David Bel there below the B the visit a little bit further down below the visit part yeah the letter letter report a letter report which describes their finings regarding the noi's conformance with mass Wetland I just didn't read far enough okay I mean okay so I think uh I I think this is the right scope yeah personally scope do you need to make it clear that you're looking for a look at the performance standards or do you think that's strong enough language as written I think it's I just hate to not can I I can just send an email to to Bob harsley the EI just just saying yeah under the letter report that that that just confirming that that includes you know okay should we close the discussion on this one so yeah I was going to say we should we should take a vote on whether or not we think we should even do a peer review that's the first question and then is this peer review adequate the scope so the first question would be do we want to do that just do a quick motion I'm going to make a motion that we authorize our agent to proceed with um sending um doing um get a PE review for us and I would just kind of combine based on this proposal that he's presented to us second okay motion from Chris second from Bill all in favor I I I John's in John did I yeah yes he enthusiastically put his hand you okay so is there is are they even on the call uh uh Bridget are you there hi yes I'm here this is Bridget from VHB I believe Helen was at the last meeting but I'm here on behal of the opans so so I did I did forward you the scope um do you have any concerns with it not on my end that we were able to review but Tim svin with Massachusetts election company is here as well if ask okay hi Tim Sullivan with National Grid um I was at I was in the last hearing as well this sounds like what we discussed um for a scope but at that time so I don't have any objection with moving forward okay all right I think uh it'll probably be a few weeks before we get the review I would think um you'll engage them yeah may may maybe by the next meeting um if you know since that's three weeks away um you know obviously obviously I'll have to get them the signed proposal and um just trying to not stack things up too much here right right so um and knowing this project is is later in the year if I remember their schedule I'm just wondering if making it like May 28th would make if or whatever the meeting after the 14th okay I I I'm just as happy with that yeah I just trying not to stack things up uh yeah the 28th would be the next the meeting I I suggest we go for that um just a little more breathing room that's fine okay I make a motion then that we continue to May 28th second assuming that's okay with the applicant we get a they look okay yeah they're they're not not's nodding he's sort of nodding I don't see any objections okay all right motion from Chris second from Bill all in favor to continue to the 28th of May hi okay so so move thank you very much we'll have a peer review hopefully we get that report by then and uh hope hopefully we can close that at that time that should go well okay thank you very much next on our agenda is there anything else on yeah we continue it so that was it okay um so next thing is the discussion on the select board's request for the Conservation Commission comments on the proposed lip at 243 riverneck road so we talked about this briefly last meeting but this was very late in the evening um I I just want to preface this by saying that David sent a good letter to the U select board I'm okay with kind of just us if if you saw that or reviewed it um just underscoring that that's that's what we voted on back then we twice denied uh the application there were lots of back and forth but to me at least when I read through this that the um the underlying issues of uh of this site being used for a uh uh for any kind of a development is it hasn't changed it's it's if not it's more precious in that it's it's priority habitat um it's you know it's uh natural heritage critical natural landscape U core habitat so all of those things nothing's changed from our point of view right um we denied it 20 years ago I think it was twice um I I don't I don't really want to get into the you know it was overridden and the state and all that that like that our position then was that and one or two of us might have been on the commission at that time I think you were bill um Chris might have been planning board then that was your that was when you defected defected the planning board for six years yeah so um you know I know uh we asked uh Ruth also to provide just a little bit of history on that but I'm I mean that I mean that was the main point implicit in my comment was you know the commission denied it twice why would the commission approve it it's kind of like what's changed yes right yeah so I did ask um both Paul and Pat Wes who's the chair of the sele board what they were looking for from us and they were just saying if we had any concerns with this and I would say yes we do you know we we did then and you know I don't think anything's changed in in in that scope it was not something we were in favor of as a commission and I I I'm I'm looking for comment from the rest of the commission I'd like to hear from Ruth but maybe Ruth do you want to just provide a little I think were you on the commission at that time you were right Ruth I wrote the decision for the denial so so just for the record two decision Ruth Luna 10 Carter Drive um so um yeah the commission denied it twice 2005 2006 both times um insufficient information in sufficient time for reviewing um and the first time there was a concern over the flood plane cuz FEMA was changing at the applicant and went with the FEMA value for the second time um both times there was concern over infiltration um the lack of hydrogo study which the applicant the second time admitted they didn't want to do it because it could significantly change their project um there was concern about wildlife habitat there was concern about the clearing of the trees that were making the Wetland be fully shaded to now be in full sun and how that would change it um the current or ad is 22 years old and at the time when I was a commissioner I noticed there was a couple of areas that appear to be missed in the bvw line since then I have found um um old records that show that there looks to be two isolated Wetlands on the site that were missed in that or ad so those would need to be checked um and so I would really recommend given that it looks like there are things that were missed that you get someone who's expert in soils when you're doing uh BBW when you're confirming the wetlands for this site as well as for the storm water because um the other thing I saw in going through old files was when someone tried the current landowner actually tried to make it be a three housee lot um there was actually a lawsuit between the planning board and the zba I remember that yes and it was the planning board said it's only a two lot site the area had been excavated for 495 there was such deep excavation that they intercepted groundwater the applicant said that they basically took away good soils they left behind large deposits of material unsuitable for septic and that there's ledge on the site and so none of those go with infiltration and then the Heritage the conservation management permit has been renewed through 2026 they have not yet finalized the CR which should be for 6.66 acres and is not shown on their plans they don't show The Zone one on their plans and if the site gets divided any review by Heritage would Encompass the whole site and then from what was said in the select Board hearing and what we've seen in the files we would also recommend that you um there be 21e testing on the site for contamination especially since you're proposing infiltration next to Zone one okay so do you have any questions one one quick question Ruth I read briefly what you sent out thank you for that are you saying that there were some ponds there yeah and are they are they gone and now it's labeled so they were labeled the same way that when we were doing the the Swamp Thing from the River Neck site the the warehouse site so those in 1980s 1987 I think it was the town had the town mapped for the sewer project and at that point they were doing more of a a overview focusing on waterways so if there was an error they missed a wetland they didn't over label a wetland so there are two areas on this site labeled HS on those plants and that's one of the ones I sent out and if you look at the bvw elevation nearby you'll see that this goes much lower than that so it would suggest that you have intercepted groundwater and so that those would be isol they need to be looked at for being isolated Wetlands but but they're the same the two ponds are the same as the two Wetlands you mentioned at the beginning the two things that I think are missing and the orad plan I sent shows where you see the Bold 106 line you can see where those excavated areas are because it goes lower there and there are houses currently situated over those okay but it's not a case of a pond or a wetland having been filled it's currently based if that M if that's they would still be there in that state yeah thank you so um our objective here is to I I would like to uh have you guys authorized me as the chair to send a confirmation letter basically supporting David's previous letter because when he sent it we hadn't discussed it that's that's my only thing they are Tak the select board is um going to the it's a follow-up meeting in two weeks I think it is is their meeting that the applicant um that's looking for this endorsement of the select board and so what we would be saying is we do not support an endorsement of this project and so I'm looking to maybe have a motion to support me writing as supporting letter not endorsing it not supporting letter per a supporting letter to not endorse the project if if that makes sense well if anything that the site has got more sensitive than it was back then 100% agree it's more precious and that there's less property like that in town so I move that we authorize our chairman to follow up with the agent's letter and just confirm it the commission is uh supports the letter that the agent had sent over indicating that we had number of concerns related to the site and that we at this point in time do not support development on that land okay motion from Chris second second from Bill all in favor I I I thank you Ruth thanks very much appreciate your your input David thanks for uh your initial letter and you know I looked I went on the gis and looked and just did the layers it's like this is it's insane it's pretty clearcut it's like this is not the place to be doing a development in my opinion but okay very good we are doing very well so that's um I will write a letter I'll send it to you guys as well but I um just as an FYI but uh I'll send it to uh the chair of the select board okay continual business an update on the open space and recck plan so we did have a kickoff meeting a week ago tonight I think it was and um it was uh well attended we had one person missing and I will tell you in the meantime that person dropped out that was Max uh Jordan he had a conflict that he was not able to reconcile with our our night uh our meeting so um but right now I'm feeling pretty good like we have a good crew um I think the work that's in front of us is pretty well defined where we have an existing plan so um I think we're in good shape we'll keep going um max was offering to help on the background uh he just said can't make Tuesday night so um so he's officially dropped off um but I think we'll be okay going forward um and and I just comment I thought our Nim Cog lead person um did a good job moving along track yeah yeah it was good it was helpful yep yep uh next thing on our agenda is the 255 Princeton Street update uh David uh well there was Willis Drive Willis Drive Willis Drive Willis drive he SK right over did I where where was Willis Drive sorry right under you okay I did the same thing so I can't criticize I must have dropped it okay what so Willis Drive uh well I brought it up at the last meeting Dave did you have a chance to talk to DPW about doing a survey on that land up there uh no no no I I have not is that is is is that is that the proposal is to have them rather than a private surror do it well some someone someone someone someone do it cuz and I went up the the day after the meeting we put two more uh of the conservation little tags on a couple trees denoting that that's conservation land but there's a question on the end closest to rout 40 the way this there's a uh Alum Aluminum deck appear going out into the water and we're not sure if that's on our land or right on the end of our land so without a survey it's hard to tell we don't want accuse someone of placing it on our property if it's not on our property and there was one other there's another spot there in front of the same house where the uh person up the street pointed out that there were parking cars there on and that would be on our land so the survey would help with a few issues down there um also up the other end further down Willis there are other cars parking what appears to be either on our land or beside it so a couple issues like that I think the only way to solve it or to move forward is to have a survey done so we know where I was it should be the lowest cost survey ever it's this end and that end right and it's a funny shape about the water in the road it's a funny shape lot although you know some of these these lakefront properties you know given given their history you know can you know establishing the legal boundary can sometimes be very challenging right and we don't accuse anybody of doing something right if it's I I I I I think my opinion is it would be better to hire you know a professional surveyor sure to do it y um which I I will certainly ask them I'm not even sure does DPW have a surveyor on staff anymore because the I forget the guy's name that was there before Scott he's gone yeah he's gone I think Trevor might qualif but he might not be Li of his time well there's that too they know how to it but I don't do you want a licensed yeah yeah so um I'll um I'll ask Hancock um and this and this will be a good opportunity to press them to finish up Warren poll oh yes right and they say you know it's still open on the EAS that still is and it's you know and we and we also want the coolest Wetlands surveyed so I can I can say you know we have a town has a couple of other projects um surveying projects but we want Warren pole wrapped up first yes I think that'll be an incentive to get them to do it yep yeah is the coolest one not to jump to so we good on that yeah that's I think that's the only way to go forward okay okay yeah I agree okay the neighbors take good care of the they mow it and stuff it looks pretty good right car yeah yeah yeah yeah well you cleaned up some stuff I know so yeah um next was the uh ongoing work at 255 Princeton Street uh so so I asked Jack Branson of DPW to uh to look at that he's the one that's been doing the regular inspections um he he came back uh he sent me an email with a bunch of photos which I did forward to commission members did anyone get those I didn't see I didn't see that I don't think I saw that okay cuz um I I think I think it was just too large with all the photos although I notice only four bounce back so I figured maybe a couple of you got it but but but the bottom line was he said that there that there was a a couple of things that there was a blow out I think in one or two locations of the erosion control he told them to fix it um I told him that we still have not received we've never received any swi Swip reports said we we want those said he would speak to his point of contact to get those done um and then and then with regards to the water level on the pond he said that said virtually all of that is coming off the road that's really he said that really was not coming off that's hard to believe that's hard to believe that's hard to believe you want you want me to ask him to to double check that well it's hard to to believe that's water's never been that high SE seen that for years and it's never been that high I can't see it all coming off youve seen hurricanes hit and it's never looked like that no I mean it seems to make sense that you know if the the site is cleared you get a little bit the hill has a lot of clearing on the side of that I don't know if you've been by the hill is cleared part way down the hill the water usually was caught by the the soils and the uh the grass and the trees up that way it just runs down hill now so yeah I mean it shows what happens when you cut all your trees down right clear vegetation there's a lot of water that was never been like that before well you know sir certainly the the commission you could certainly take it all the way to enforcement order enforcement order says you know you know provide evidence to the commission that there's no increase in runoff from the site which would be a violation of I think um standard two um you could certain I think that'd be perfectly reasonable since what I'm hearing is you've never seen it this it's never been that high and we've got these challenges going forward will increase not just this site but others I agree so you know you can think about that if you don't want to make a decision tonight but I I I would recommend that they need they need to show us that there's no increase and runoff into that pond yeah so let's let's continue this to like our next meeting have you take have a chance to look at it I no you don't have any right idea what it look like before no no but I believe you but yeah it it'll give you a chance in your spare time to by it's quite it's an time you're not writing orders of conditions all that other stuff I mean Jack Jack did say yeah it's very close to the road um but take a look at it it's quite the sight and then I think we just let's take it up at our next meeting maybe we do head down an enforcement path on honestly on it but because I mean that that could have you know implications to wildlife habitat it could ly impact the commission's interest yeah yeah yeah did you notice any silk going into the pond no I just look from the street you can see the the height of the water right but you would see Sil should follow I wasn't looking that close you don't know and Jack didn't say anything about silt no so you know they did I I would say they they seem to have done a good job putting like the uh the sock around it oh the silt fence I I watch them do it they they did a good job of the silt fence and the and the uh sock around but uh I just think with all the trees cut and the the way that they changed elevations up the top maybe some of that water's coming down faster than it used to yeah doesn't have a chance to go away I think a couple good rainstorms you'd be pretty close to going onto Princeton Boulevard it was close water is close okay all right we'll monitor this at our next meeting um there's two more um update well I don't have updates because David and I talked about the uh uh last week last meeting we had the issue on Carlile Street and we also had the issue on 35 brick Hill and the Town Council has actions on both of those and we've pinged him and he has not responded so we're guessing that's in process but um we don't really have an update so we're staying on top of that we'll let you know what's going on there um we also have uh Warren pole CR um we did get the uh I get your note on the um bdr with Ann so I think we'll be we'll be good on that I'll I'll get that out for our next meeting uh to the commission to review but I think we're almost there I happen to see Becky today and she was she was happy with where we were so I'm I think we're almost there uh on the coolest property um Mark you were there I was a week and a half ago or so yeah yeah uh we met Paul was there all of uh uh Phil's agent whatever they want to call themselves the uh we walked the site there was a a lot of work was done by DPW there it probably shouldn't have been done but it was done uh we walked out back with a wetland up front is a Vernal pool was quite large I didn't realize how big it was it's almost like an acre really yeah I think it's bigger than one we were there in the fall it's it's good size yeah it is but up back I walked in a lot of tree cutting has been done a lot of stumps have been removed in the wetlands and I I told the guys that were working there you just can't do that you know clean the trails out but you got to keep away from the wetlands really they have great plans and doing a lot of stuff and they all got great intentions there just not they're not being told what to do they they have no Direction they just do what they want well this is the first I've heard that there were trees and remove as trees and stumps removed from the wetlands actually in the wetlands there there's they weren't big they were probably like that big but the things have been cut out of you can see they've been cut and your sh it was Wetlands inside the blue flags it was wet okay but maybe not Wetlands well that was certified well that was that this is the reason the tree committee went out there a couple weeks ago did you see evidence of that sure okay all right so yeah sounds like we got a problem yeah so we've had some conversations with uh Christine on this you have I know um well well there's kind of two things that happened um you know DPW was asked to go ahead and do a bunch of things you know clean up the barn and make some parking and you know that was a direction of the town and they did I think exactly what they were asked to do um they were careful about a lot of the trees but you know they had the junk all around the trees and so you know there's no point the thing there was a lot of crap you know they like you said well intentioned I I will say there were there were um vehicles with trees embedded in them so by definition when you move the vehicle the trees going to get damaged right right and I think cut out but I think the important thing from our point of view is the DPW work was done under the direction of our town tree Warden who has the authority for public trees Christine who comes to all the tree committee meetings she's totally invested in you know trying to do things the right way this wasn't just a crazy out of- control thing you can argue whether maybe a couple trees could have been saved or not but I don't think that's worth discussion then the second activity was the the trail clearing that I think you're referring to yeah which you know again I think that was done under direction of somebody from the town and you know I don't the trees Mark when I was there I mean yeah sure there were trees cut down in a wetland but there wasn't anything significant oh nothing nothing more than like a 3in 2in Gallop of trees yeah yeah I mean really they didn't do like a massive clearing or anything like that so I I just think they don't know where to delineate and that's the problem there's no Direction out there yeah yeah yeah that's the problem well they might have done it before it was flagged too cuz they get in there right off the bat okay yeah true before it was even flagged yeah yeah so that'd be really difficult it had I mean yeah yeah but they were working in there yeah okay no those everybody was working in there has great intentions I don't that they do I I I think people kind of did what they were asked to do by the town I think it's important somebody here oh somebody it wasn't just you know a bunch ofbody you know uncontrolled okay but I I just happen to mention when I was there that uh I think the fellow in charge there Phil brought up things of uh and and I came back with the boy cars love to do projects and we have money to give so the guys can do projects so I just let let that out there because I think it's a good idea to we haven't done it in so long when's the last time we did a Boy Scout project a couple years oh probably four or five years years been now okay yeah and that well well and and again I to beli this but that was I had a long chat with Phil this time I was out there I've actually been out there a couple times I think I might have mentioned to you guys a couple weeks ago and that was the tone of the discussion we all have good intentions of everybody we've got let's just pull everybody together and find ways to get even more things done right yep agreed so I walked across to uh Ray back was putting in the pumpkins and he had it was terrible and it were ticks but we went in there walked he showed me what a deline delineation is he has tape there he showed me he was going to roota till or turn the soil over there for pumpkins it seemed fine not not a problem at all aome good yeah okay good and and John's already excited to go to the meeting on Friday night at 5:00 I'm super excited okay what meeting is that Friday night 5:00 coolest meeting coolest task force Friday five on site is this is that on no at the pub oh they might not want me to go yeah okay so a couple more things um Russell Mill we had a um a resident who mentioned the tree damage last week at um or last meeting at Russell Mill I did go out there um that was Mrs PID I looked up her name um if I have that right um and I did go out there and look um I did see uh that you know it refreshed the evidence that I saw before which is clearly somebody was being um malicious and um perhaps even dangerous and damaging lots of trees um I did bring my trail cam I have one and I my intention was to set it up in a nice place to try to see if we can see something and I realized anywhere that I put it that it's going to catch somebody it's going to disappear it I I lose my trail cam so it just I said this is not going to work it just isn't going to work uh in the meantime I did get an um email from uh Chris from the nemba group who is there on site a lot she had all he they had also got the notice from um Miss P City and they've been out there and they said um they were s they had noticed the damage but they were surprised at the extent of it uh on the site but they will same as us it's like it's not a whole lot we can do they'll be there a lot they have their eyes wide open looking trying to monitor hopefully it's a oneoff situation where somebody just got mad or drunk or whatever um but it was pretty extensive um the other thing Chris sent to me was that they he sent me the draft of speaking of theou with cost um we talking about the cost stuff um theou with uh nemba he's got a draft to me uh that I had sent to him so he came back so that was just this afternoon we also talked he also talked about the shed um remember we talked about having the shed roof done said they do have a quote they're willing to take care of the roof but um we do need a permit it's over 200 ft it's 14 by 16 I think something like that so it's um it's it's it does need a building permit I think it's under do they have to they going apply but they have to pay for a permit or will that be exempt I'm not sure cuz it's Town property um if if we have to pay for it I think we can pay for it or whatever although it's what is it 50 bucks 100 bucks I I don't is is that why the dumpster is there so I'll get there I'll get there yep um so so they're we're we're going to still work on that try to get the try to make that happen um and then they did an Earth Day cleanup last Saturday on the site that included the trails the parking lot the soccer field and the Nature Park um and that DPW uh dropped the dumpster there on site and um it they've I don't know if they filled it up but um they got a lot of stuff in there onto the into that dumpster so that's that's looking good and then when I had Mar uh walked the site with them back in March I we identified a couple of signage things that they're going to work on just some clarifying signs on the trails so um I'm feeling good about how they're supporting us on that site it's uh it's going well they're very anxious to keep helping and doing good stuff there it's a busy site there's a lot of people on that site um yeah so that's the dumpster if you saw I just have one more thing to add on the tree damage issue when oh okay yeah um so um I I've been speaking uh with Russ and Jeff lurvy I don't know people know anyone know them there um there's Russ and his son Jeff um his adult son Jeff uh I guess they use that uh reservation quite a bit and um Russ Russ was asking if the commission might be willing to engage the services of uh maybe an arborist or you know otherwise a tree expert to assess the damage that's been done to the trees if any of them are in Mortal danger or just how severely injured they have been you think maybe that's something Jim Martin would be able to do or well yeah we could bring it to the tree solicit the tree committee a couple ARS there right yeah that's a good idea and then if there's more to it and and and not to go on a big tangent but one of our master plan goals that I have to report on that didn't happen yet got delayed is we're we have an assignment to come up with some sort of urban forestry plan yeah right like we never heard of this but but the point is I have a contact with the DCR force or maybe the same guy we're trying to reach but there are some things we could do with some of the Town Forest that might benefit from an expert either now or down the road so we could have the tree committee guys if they're willing the the true tree guys um take a quick look but maybe if we do something bigger down the road so so can you can you ask them to do that you know take a look at those do I'll ask right and do do you want to be involved I mean it's really probably just Jim Martin and I walking the site you just uh let me know by email sure you know whatever the result is you don't have anything to do right focus on those order of conditions right all right all right um so the only other things David was the 120 conquered road we've had that discussion a little bit about the um forestry plan so yes um and I I guess John spoke with the owner I spoke to the owner and it's a stat mandated thing they do every 10 years they have a forest to come in he marks the trees that are going to be cut everybody's notified including the town of chood because they're adjacent and it's been done for years okay his father did it and Mark's done it and uh yeah I I I I'm I still think they need a forest cutting Plan before they can actually do it it's a it's a it's a state he's going with it's a state thing so it's in the state's hands y well right but but the state's requirements as I understand them for wetland protection are at least to my read are very similar to ours so I think you're right if if there is a state plan that's sort of modern I don't know what I mean by by that and they're following it I think that meets what we would want to see but this I don't believe the state has any involvement during construction during during logging well so that's probably your concern well they approve the forest cutting plan and you know that I mean we need to see that because saying there are wet there are wetlands out there that's right there are wetlands what are they going to do to protect the wetlands and you've been asking them and they're not responding and in fact in fact I called once and and they didn't even know who I was talking about so I think it might have been an answering service it black was very he had mentioned to me that he thought the Foresta had contacted the town not as far as I well they could have called somebody well I know they didn't call me well there is a DCR Regional Forester and the their office is in L and and I called the L office and they said oh I think that person retired or they didn't know who I was talking about you know I might I might I might have the person's name I'll take a look make sure we're talking to the same person that would be great and the last thing was the fire tower I I went up to look at the fire tower at those trees that the state police wants to cut and um I I told you when we talked yesterday that it's not clear to me what trees we're talking about but if it's I I actually got a voicemail today from the guy the state police guy who said they haven't marked the trees yet okay apparently he's waiting to hear from me that the commission is just conceptually okay with taking down Seven Trees yeah so so I'll I'll I'll I'll let him he said that last time I think did we well we said we're okay we taken trees down but what was there a possibility to kind of top them you know where it made sense too I think based on what I saw there I'd say take them down okay there there there's a lot of trees up there you were out there there's seven trees that they want to take down for for state police that that's not going to move the needle a whole lot okay I'll I'll let him know and then once they do that he'll see the mark okay okay is that up at the at the at the top right up at the top the the tower did you climb up the top of the tower drove right up to the tower that's that's locked up now is that something yeah yeah it's locked around the tower but but you can drive right up some years back with both my kids we we went all the way up there and uh it's quite a view with there was a ranger up there and you can see for like I guess once in a while you can get up there but yeah it's it's it's spectacular it really changes your perspective on the miramac valley it's amazing view I mean you see for 100 miles all you see is trees I kept going where's 495 can we um can we request the state police to um have a we need a site visit on the tower with the whole commission hey joking aside could we ask them if they could was it them or is it the the the fire the fire guy in the summer yeah there that's just for the radio it is it is dcr's fire tower and they gave permission to the state police to put their microwave transmission all right last thing is we don't have any meeting minutes available to approve so well no there there is one more thing oh um so um we touched on it earlier but uh Mark asked Brandon Canada the new superintendent of the water district thank you Mark uh to reach out to me um and you know introduce himself and ask for a meeting and uh I was really really happy to see that because uh at the very least there has been a really serious communication deficiency um with the water district um it was alluded to tonight that I didn't get a copy of the letter that Mr Higgins was talking about they they have they have told the applicant to do things at hildr that I had no idea about and the neighbors called me out on the site you know they thought there were violations so I I think I think this is really going to be helpful Mark Mark and I are going to meet with him and you know talk about improving you know communication and you know keeping each other in the loop so I thank you thanks again Mark I was really glad I like to get the other East and North CHS involved too so it's all one town let's get it all done the same time true we don't have as much business in east and north but right right at the moment but but but yeah you're right do they have a Boards of water Commissioners as well oh yeah what they do I they're all actually independent quas governmental and you're not allowed to ask why but Center Center is about 80% of the town is that roughly right Mark something like ballark maybe yeah something like that little less that's good to hear though but but it's funny if you watching the town Facebook pages and people complaining about water quality I'm like I I don't have any complaints but they're different systems MH yeah okay I move to journ motion from Chris second from all right I don't we have to second that all in favor all in favor turn e for