[Music] good evening it being 7:01 we're going to be opening up the town of Halifax Conservation Commission meeting for Tuesday January 25th 2024 um those members in attendance is Miss King uh Kathy Evans Alan Diaz and Miss plant absent would be um uh Miss Bain okay um I want to point out that this meeting is being advertised or being recorded by area 58 the this meeting will be will be able to be viewed on YouTube um today is our first evening where all of our new hearings will be at 700 p.m. so just bear with us on the schedule um I am going to be looking to take one of these hearings out of order but the first item on our agender is number 36 Avenue okay Miss Nelson there yesd me no what you can do uh the speaker over there why don't we move that over to maybe to that side do you want me to move that microphone you saying over to there okay so Susan Nelson 36 B okay so we submitted the plans for clearing of the area you know um in between my house and the neighbor's house waiting for um approval or denial versus what we've submitted um and what the board has us required to do asked us to do did you submit some of the u a planting schedule I sent it today yep you sent it today did it sent it by email yep I sent it to both you and Peggy okay um if I may um the Nelsons have been in I know maybe the third or fourth time this is the one on the RDA they were they wanted to fill in an area which is a a large hole in the front yard y they wanted to put some L on the rear yard and they wanted to remove some trees um which are probably about 80 ft from the pond and that's where the uh the controversy Rose um I did do an on-site inspection with Mr Nelson he did show me the trees that wanted to come down um they ranged from 1 to 2 in to about a 6 in caliper they they appeared to be PS um the best of my recollection what they I think weren't they excuse me oh Maples Maples okay thanks for correcting um the what they proposed to do was to remove all the trees they couldn't do it selectively and to put up some sort of a screening and I don't have the names of the trees do you know which trees you want after learning a lot about like trees and what kind the Green Giant aites seem to be the most I guess um ones that will agree with our you know our area so no cu the other ones I picked he's like deers like those I'm like well we saw a deer over at the beach so um you know he helped me pick them out and with the size that we wanted um for anywhere between 6 to 8 feet nothing bigger than that okay and this is the one we spoke about last meeting that the the trees have all grown towards the sunlight they're all C over yeah so I think it would be an improvement um any members of the boards have any questions no I caught up on the last meeting I was able to watch it and thank you for all the work and hard work that you've done and I'm familiar with the neighborhood even though I haven't done a site visit and I i' agree with their choice that it would be an improvement and replacing the trees as sufficient to what you removing and I have no issues with you filling in your front yard and things like that okay Kathy uh no no questions no questions that's fine no questions any members of the AUD audience have a question or comment on 36th Avenue no I would be looking for a motion do we have a folder on it or we do and it looks like the last thing received was June 25th um so nothing new yeah it took me a little bit to go back and forth with the landscaper but he sent it to me this morning nope that's okay so there's nothing doing the folder from so we' be um approving it based on the email that she sent us yeah yes and DIY I did see the trees or I did see this this these are the areas that were Disturbed I did see something from them which I thought she was going to send to Peggy but you know I talked to Peggy at 5 tonight there was just some other issues um but I think at the green giantes um so was replacing I'm sorry yes a question sure so replacing the and taking those trees down putting in the aites filling in that indentation in the front yard yep and was there anything with a retaining wall or was there something that's seal retaining wall was oce never not okay no no the other the other side like the just the Lo the grass grass in the front of the in the considered the back of the house towards the water yeah okay like I said no fertilizer just hydr seeding and fingers crossed that something grows um but just more getting rid of the hole and and the trees I I did resubmit more uh pictures with the the um this landscaper description so um that shows where they overdo the overhang the wires and um you know interfere with that so that was the other concern for us to take them down and have something that growes straight versus over the wires so um so just want to make sure that because the original when she came in front of us originally for the RDA it was stated that it was going to be a fence potentially the arbites were not part of that so when we approve this or issue a negative determination is there a way to have in in that that it is conditional upon the arbites replacing yes yeah we could place that order in okay yeah and then along with like the um procedure that we need to do to put when he does the loom in that I know there was a question of how to put it on so that it doesn't go back into the water so if you could just put that in so I can give that to him I'm sure knows but just so um so maybe if you want to make a u a motion that we require a sulation barrier something that's removable on the Pond's Edge just to clean up that area okay I'll make that motion um I'll make a motion to issue a negative determination for the RDA conditional upon the arbites replacing the trees and a saltation barrier being installed um where you plan to do the loom and Seed it okay I'm looking for a motion uh second for that second okay well I'm going to have you seconded for discussion um I just want to make a comment that once the project is completed please provide us with some photographs okay so that we know that it was done all right so one you can do that in 3 months or six months you don't to do the next summer is not the best time to be planted those correct so when it's done you've got some time on this so when it's done just provide the office with some the finish I can do that so I have a motion in a second I'll go to a vote all in favor I I okay 4 Z you all set we will be sending you out I don't know that we've got the paperwork is there any paperwork in there I gave Kathy the folder that it right there let me just see if like the signature page is that okay we will be signing that um you need to wait until you get this and then during the appeal period okay thank you so much oh that mhm all right thank you where do we see the property this this is going to go on the back page of the okay so there's nothing that says that this is the right property no other than okay just sign in last page she'll incorporate them moment this was with it though right yes okay thank you them the next matter on the agenda is 265 mon Pon Street D number se-171 0578 that is going to be a new hearing and I'm going to ask that the advertising notice be read into the record notice is hereby given of a public hearing conducted by by the Halifax cons forication committee under the provisions of mgl 131 section 40 in chapter 146 of the town of Halifax on Tuesday June 25th 2024 at 700 p.m. at the Halifax town hall to consider the notice of attent filed on May 13th 2024 by jde civil industry of Northeastern Mass on behalf of the applicant at chose 65 mon P Street reality Trust of South NE for a proposed development of two multi-unit buildings for 55 plus senior housing pick a ball court pool house with pool Associated parking and garages and site Utilities in grading each building will have 36 units for a total of 7 72 senior housing units in storm water management at the property located at 2651 ponson Street shown on our sess of map 6 for Lot 10 copies of the filing are available at the conservation commission's office at the Halifax Town Hall per request by emailing Peggy Selter Halifax dma.org or by calling 78159 3872 okay good evening identify yourself for the record uh good evening David E for development um this is actually our second meeting on this hearing this isn't the first so I want to make that point initially okay we will continue to this stage okay I apologize problem just going by the agenda just straight um so for this evening uh I don't plan a uh a large presentation uh we just receiv received a peer review comments from ecosystems yesterday and uh we have our comments from Pat Brandon from uh we two ago uh so we're in the process of um uh responding to those comments and uh for the most part everything is uh you know crystal clear and the like there was one topic I did want to um bring up in front of the commission as I thought you might have uh some specific helpful input and that was uh Brandon Fu had a had a comment um about us investigating alternate locations for the replication Wetlands replicated wetlands and so uh we're certainly open to that uh we chose see if I can get yeah can you get to the page um I can get it on here are they controlling this or's a let me see if I can press screen so I I can get it I had a little bit of experience with this last week that picture there shows the the wet on replication area okay I just bear with me I think we set up right first this you can zoom in oh you zoomed out I think I zoomed out okay that okay I I don't have yeah that's totally fine okay um can you before you get going uh just for the members of the audience and the board kind of show us which areas are the wetlands areas the buff zones um and so forth y so uh on this plan blue indicates the weapons themselves the magenta line the magenta line um magenta line is the 50ft buffer and the yellow line is the 100t buffer uh to the wets so there's a system here that we call a wetland area a it's identified with Wetland flags that begin with the letter A this is what we call Wetland system B kind of both of these together and Wetland system C is kind of off the page down here um this was a project that was permitted way back in 2014 and 2015 it was issued in order of conditions at that time the project was abandoned uh Midstream um or actually very very much at the beginning so uh there was some work done on the site some pavement stalls some utilities um a foundation located right here for a sixun building and then the project basically stopped so part of that order of conditions uh required uh a Wetlands replication area to be constructed um right here and so when we uh took on a new project at the same location uh we figured well we should continue that um installation of the wetlands area as previously approved um so that was what was behind us choosing this location because presumably 10 years ago the Conservation Commission um approved that location so uh fast forward to today we have a comment saying have you considered other locations because this area has some um very large um mature trees in the area it's also steeply slope so you have to kind of batter back the slope a little bit and disturb more area plus I I agree with the comment that that looking at it fresh today it's probably not the best location also we don't plan to do any work in this area but you have to get to this right so by its very nature you're going to have to get equipment fairly large excavation equipment down through this area just to get it which is more disruption of existing vegetation so again we're we're open to the idea we think it's um a good one uh he did not recommend a specific location so I I wanted to just see I know you have both have also received these comments just yesterday so you may have not have time to process um but this work oh sorry on so um So based on assume criteria of trying to find the location that is obviously adjacent to a wetland expands a wetland that um uh disturbs little uh existing wooded area and also um perhaps is in an area that's farther away from development and also in an area that's maybe not so steeply sloped um I was eyeing this location down here W that's that's really impressive yeah so this location won't get too close over here has a potential location so I wanted to see what whether the commission had any initial thoughts um that area is not particularly steep there's probably one large tree that need to be taken down in order to get adjacent to those Wetlands um it's uh about the spot farthest away from any uh development and that closest development is actually some uh bio swales associated with the pickleball courts um so that was really the only specific topic that I wanted to to bring up and planning on responding and writing on um all the uh comments from the peer reviewers may I ask a question sure Mr and of course listen to what other comments you might have a question for me how many mature trees would need to be removed from the original area now that it's 10 years later I would say about four to five um and they're quite large pine trees they're um I would say 30in plus diameter fully mature 75 Footers that that type of thing um that's what's kind of right right there the ones adjacent to to Wetland a over there they're still uh generally large um there are more Hardwoods and uh are probably more in the 18 to 24 in range but again I think we can find a spot where maybe we don't even take one of the big ones down it's just more of the let's say scrub that comes down thank you any other questions relative to the replication area with with Wetland a would you disturb less vegetation as you would with the original that was approved in 2014 yes there will be less disturbance of vegetation you should rep replication area a wetland area a area would have would have less than his original getting access to that area um right now it's it's Meadow that essentially surrounds it there's kind of about a 20 foot wooded buffer that encircles it and then I think probably either as when it was farmland or cleared as part of the previous uh development it really turns into uh straight on Meadow so just tall grasses really no uh Woody vegetation okay KY questions no I don'tk you I personally don't see an issue I think that's something you could propose we'll include that as long as the soils in that area are conducive I know we did ask for some soil logs but long as I'm assuming you've got some hydric soils in that area you you going to come up with the same replication plan as you had in the back yes we'll come up with the same level of detail um that we uh that we have there um I mean probably move that those details over if you will in terms of the plants he was facing and the like um this is a lot just easier um you know area to get to um you know normally I think the previous location was chosen because uh the disturbance was adjacent to that Wetland so typically you do the restoration area adjacent to the wetlands that you disturb so this would be adjacent to a different you know uh Wetland but again we're we're if that's the pleasure of the commission and the peer reviewer we're we're open to it kind of agree with the comments yeah I think the commission be okay with it the what you're going to have to resubmit that then it'll have to be re-reviewed to make sure that that it conforms to our regulations yeah we'll submit it as part of our response to comments for all respons I don't really think you need to vote on that I think you got the general consensus yeah understod I had one other kind of detailed question uh there was a request to do a Stakeout uh for uh limit of work and proposed structures within the uh buffer zone okay if you don't mind sure could we stay with the review portion and then we'll get into that was there any other comments that were on the review uh there was some more comments on the review if you want to just deal with that and then the fire was taken out we can deal with that last um again I've received the comments I've had a chance to review them I don't I don't really have any questions or concerns about the other comments I think they're straightforward and and uh to to address I don't think there's anything particularly controversial there so I I'm I'm happy to kind of go through them and and give you kind of our where we're headed on our responses but or you can choose to wait for kind of the formal response let me just ask they're asking for some additional sedimentation controls which would be fine around your basins um there's a question it does no there's no location here the potential veral pool mhm uh no the rep's replication is currently proposed next to the potential veral pool so that that comment would be eliminated if you remove it and put it in wetlands area a not necessarily Wetlands a is also a potential Vernal pool okay so both both Wetlands A and B are potential vernal pools okay so this comment as far as where the location is presently where you've proposed it we can get rid of that comment and we'll have to deal with the veral pool on the next set of comments yes ask a question suree would um the replication disturb the Vernal pool at all no it needs to touch it um you know basically to be at that same grade and uh usually you want it to be contiguous um for you know the the critters to be able to kind of expand their environment um but uh it um uh but you don't actually go into the themselves okay question um so as of this moment they're not registered vernum pools they're just suspected uh they're potential vernal pools they are not certified vernal pools uh we submitted a um a report um this pre predates uh the chair um being on the commission but um we did a uh an orad process and we also did a um uh environmental assessment of the site um that has been submitted to the commission that included a study of the Vern vernal pools the conclusion was that they were eligible to be um uh vernal pools and to be certified um and that um it was actually kind of an odd thing but it was a condition of the OR at approval to do a verol study so we we've done that study the commission previously voted to accept that study as um satisfaction of that condition of the aura um so anyways there's there's information that we've submitted regarding the study and the quality of the veral pools and exactly you know kind of um again their their environmental let's say status if you will okay the comment number three indicates that there is no copy of the oad could you provide that just in case we've had some some some Transitions and staff so just could you if you don't mind sending it to the office and also send it to ecosystems y sure yeah got a copy on the 30th January 30th and then the um the approval from the commission was on February 27 justy yeah if you can just CC him that so he can y we have meeting minutes too from that and on number five um which is basically uh recommending some special conditions on the uh replication area which I don't really see any problem with they'll carry over to the front area that you're going to uh replicate excuse me Mr chair yes there are Department comments um Chief sha has no comments when it eggy sent out the email on this project the Board of Health responded on June 5th of 2024 when the Board of Health receives the septic proposed plan we will ensure the ms4 requirements from comcom our ahead you and the building department responded that there were no comments for the project at this time Mr chair yes I actually believe that those uh responses were related to the storm water permit not the notice of intent correct just for clarification but I recognize that there is plenty of overlap yeah there is overlap and there's aot there's a lot of confusion and he's correct that was on the storm water we submitted the storm water what's happened though is some of the emails say 266 and they're actually 265 uh with those numbers very close and there's so much going on so there has been a little confusion there nope that's okay they are both folders so I wanted to make sure they went on the record the comments uh would be specifically required for storm water management not necessarily for the noi um but we still have a ways to go on the on the N um so you had a question as to um why we're going to and we'll discuss this and my my uh email to the thik was that um but I think we would like to see the limit of work staked out prior to the construction um my reasoning and the board agree disagree is that um you got a very large area out there um you know we're volunteers who would like to go out to see at least I would like to Goot out to see just how close you're going to be to the wellons versus a plan um and I it's a requirement that we're asking all of our Engineers to do so that we go out to do a site visit that we're not guessing as to where the structure going to go because we're going to be lost out there mhm so um the limit of the work I think and maybe the corners of the buildings I don't think we'd ask you to St out the whole building um but if you go up into this area here if you can flick the next page um show how this works building so uh so if you bring me the see right in this area here yep okay I mean there's your there's there's your 100 foot but you have garages yep you got a swimming pool you got everything that's all within the 50 so um and then you got whatever the other structure is there can't see it from here so that that was my reasoning um for that and I have requested that for all projects and I think that moving forward that we're going to require that in all projects um and I think really if you want to just drop down a bit this is the most impactful area here you got the garages and then you've got this swimming pool area yeah um down below I mean all you really have is some some grading in here but I think it's part of the order of conditions that we're going to require that some posting be done so that the contractors realize that there not going to be any activity Beyond this point and that is the 50 Foot yep so so uh no objection to performing the survey I've actually uh teed it up with our surveyor um already my really my question was um are you looking for locations just within the 100 foot or um kind of the 100 foot plus a little in terms of locating the structures uh I understand locating the limit of work will do along the entire Edge anyways honestly we can use that same survey for our hopefully a future silk fence location so it's we have to do it anyways I'll kind pull the board on this but um you know I I think it's important that we're going to go out into a site visit at some point that we know where the structures going go um I would be more concerned of activities which is our jurisdiction between the 50 and the 100 um does the board sort of concur with that so I think that if you got some activity um between the 50 and the 100 that we'd like to have some ideas to where it is so we'll do the structures inclusiv of of the retaining walls um between the 50 and 100 cuz the retaining walls are often the structure closest to the to the white okay great that's that's Clarity uh for me um just to be sure you're going you're going to be locating this 50t line here the limit of work which is going to be that particular line then if you drop it down a little bit I mean you don't the only thing you have in this area here sorry you don't have you know you got a limit of work here yeah we have a limit of work and then there's there are actually no structures in this case so so all I think what would be looking for is just the limit of work in this particular area and then as you drop it down then obviously the limit of work here with the citation GES and wall pool correct um you know we don't need the full corners of the pool we just need some something to to show that's where the pool is going to be and then also here you don't have much here because you get some drainage so I think in this particular area the limit of work should be sufficient yeah we'll do the um limit of work and the maybe the corner of the pickle ball court or something get your reference is everybody on the vot okay with that I I don't really need a vote but um no it's a great idea I like it okay okay good um I see Mr Brenan is in attendance I don't know whether no if I'll let you finish up there's anything else you want to present um where we do not have a complete set of plans and they everything has not been uh approved uh I'll ask U ecosystems if they want to make any comments but we won't take any official action hopefully we'll we will be able to uh get a site visit because this this stuff here is is stuff that you in the in the ecosystems can work out um Mr ecosystems is in the house I know that you're next so um if you're done presenting we we'll we'll see Mr ecosystems and um see if he's got any comments um and then I think we we're going to probably ask that we have a site inspection sure um yeah the survey will be uh ready before the 4th so um uh you know we can coordinate offline as to the the date of a site inspection um but just to let you know we I've teed it up already pending clarification this evening so they'll they'll they'll have it done before the 4th of July okay Stan any comments if you do I'll have you come up to the speaker I actually after listening to all that I actually done you covered it all okay all right from now on just I'd also like to okay just go to the mic because we we're um we have everything on tape and you get the cameras over get thank you Brandon fan off ecosystem Solutions uh I'm the uh well and scientist peer reviewer for this project um yeah I I I had comments but but they were all covered in the discussion so there really I don't have anything substantial more to add okay yeah and and I also want to introduce you to uh miget bacon uh was also with the ecosystem staff and and she's a professional engineer and a professional we scientist too so she helped me out with this one okay so you'll be under taking the balance of the revieww which um isn't very very complicated um I don't see it I don't think this you know the issues with the the vental pool and the replication area are all standard sentation controls okay yes and and the suggestion to put the uh replica are over by the a series W9 I personally don't have an issue with that I think there's going to be less disturbance over in that area which is the whole reason why we brought the actually it was miget predit her for for uh getting on top of that so okay I think the commission's glad you did that because we haven't been on the site and we didn't know this 30in Pine seas in the replication area yeah yeah when I when I was down on the site and I took a picture of it it's in the uh a review it was a beautiful little frog pond with all sorts of activity in there and it would seem like such a shame oop sorry seemed like such a shame to go in there and you know it's not only the tree removal but the amount of grading that's going to be required to get to the proper elevations it would be a lot lot of disturbance switch so I'm I'm glad the the applicant you know took a look at it and says he agree so I think we're all on the same page okay yeah and as far as the Vernal pool certification uh it sounds like the study was done and they are certifiable yes so that's that really goes back to the commission as to whether or not is a part of a condition um of the the order you could you could require certification I think it would add some uh extra Protections in the long run and excuse me S as to going haywire today but offset any potential adverse impacts to uh okay all right thank you so much I am going to open it up to the audience just for some brief questions but we don't have a full complete plan so is there anybody in the audience that wants to comment on the notice of intent for 265 mon F Street Okay um what's the board's pleasure did you have another comment there I think uh at this point I just ask for a continuance uh to the next year okay what I'm going to do is U get the some feedback from the board and who wants to do a site visit um because the nature of this project I think we we do need to do something so um I would be first looking for motion if we're going to do a site visit and then we can coordinate into the office if there's going to be more than three then we will post that I I think it would be beneficial if the whole board could go out that way that we've all seen it um like all the boards we've done with multiple other large projects to this scale okay you want to make that motion and we'll go to discussion I make a motion that the entire board go out to do a site visit for 265 mon ped street because of the scale of the project looking for a second a second okay all in favor I okay 4 um what I would suggest your schedules are are Tougher Than the Rest um this is my last meeting so um my term was an interim term and it's over on the 30th and I'm not being reappointed I'm choosing not to be reappointed due to my schedule so I won't be a member of the board after this meeting okay okay well we get a motion in a second um I think Peggy can coordinate through the office to find the schedule your schedules are probably going to be worse than mine I'm usually available um it's going to be after the 5th of July um and we'll have a poster meeting it be some mornings some afternoon whatever um both you guys have full-time jobs could I just request more than 24 hours notice it's hard when the email comes in within only 18 hours notice to sort to go out to do a site visit it doesn't happen often but when it does it makes it hard for me to be able to okay I'm not clear no I just like 24 hours notice of when we're going to go okay my suggestion would be you can coordinate your schedule with with the admin and her schedule okay I can make the rest okay all right if it's during if do you think it's going to be after the it will be after the holiday um Saturday let me see the 5ifth yeah I mean potentially I don't know if for you the one are working that Saturday after the holiday um I'm working you are working okay that's my weekend off so we have opposing weekends I work every weekend do you okay I'm every other what is your schedule mornings can you do in the afternoon yep okay if potentially can do it in the afternoon um I think the best thing to do is you we meal Peggy with your schedule you with hers and she'll post a meeting accordingly she can just call me and we'll post the meeting okay cool okay all right I'm looking for a motion to continue can I make a comment um so I I like the suggestion of ecosystems to require the certification of the vernal pools so how do we um go about requesting that do we need to wait until the continuation of the hearing um Mr estrid I'll I'll let yeah answer that if I think you know if if that's a request of the commission it would get rolled into the conditions as part of the um boorder of conditions you know so it doesn't have to be you know done now it's just as long as it's done before anything is issued okay um so we'll include a discussion on it I agree with melan yeah okay yeah we'll we'll include a response and our response to comments since it is on the the list from ecosystems and uh go from there okay um I'm not that familiar so I'm just going to ask Brandon if you don't mind just I'm going to ask you a couple questions she's got questions on the veral pool is is that standard operating procedure to include that in the order of conditions are you going to certify anything prior I I agree Mr chairman that that would be uh the standard uh fair forur in order a condition a special condition and the order conditions this okay and then and then you can um know you can put timelines uh like we need to see the paperwork before you break ground or before uency perm minute is issued something like that and so yeah okay very good thank you any other questions I would be looking for a motion to continue uh 2 265 on P Street I make a motion to continue 265 mon conet Street to our would you like our next meeting and the meeting after that uh July 9th please to our July 9th meeting I'm looking for a second I second all in favor I 4 z z um thank you very much we're going to schedule for 7 p.m. not saying that you're going to be on at 700 p.m. yep thank you um if the audience doesn't mind we have one two three four five six hearings with Mr Webby on Hill the lane which I think are going to take some time but we do have one hearing that I think will be very quickly which is 347 Elm Street do the parties from uh you hold the L Haywood any objection to that no don't okay do we have someone here in 347 Elm Street Collins engineering you here I'm the owner I'm not fromins engineer you the owner okay is Collins going to be here it's supposed to be do you want to wait okay yeah okay all right that's fine wor y okay uh next item on the agenda is 8 Hill the lane roadway D number SE 171-3 on the agenda it says it's continued hearing so I'm assuming that the that is continued from whatever a date theny yourself record pleas I'm sorry he was outside so oh okay um do do you mind do you mind okay okay um just hold on a second I'm going to have you go to the microphone we're going to read the the meeting notice and we'll have you I have no idea what he how do he say to move it we're going to move to I believe it's a touch screen do you want me to just try to touch that t I'll have touch it 347 stre right at the end okay you go okay this is a new hearing can I have you read that into the record 347 347 Elm Street Halifax Max the Public Notices notices hereby given of the public hearing conducted by the Halifax Conservation Commission on under the provisions of mgl chapter 131 section 40 Wetland protection act in chapter 164 of the town of Halifax on Tuesday June 25th 2024 at 700 p.m. at the Halifax town hall to consider a notice of attent submitted by Colin civil engineering of West Bridgewater on behalf of John talini of Halifax Mass foros construction of a detached garage at 347 Elm Street Halifax Mass Mass shown in assesses map 7 lot 2s copies of the filing are available at the conservation commission's office at the Town Halifax Town Hall per requests by email peggy. halifax. org or by calling 78159 3872 okay the meeting is now open identify yourself for the record please good evening everyone for the record Peter lions with Civ in group here tonight with the property owner um first let me stop by apologizing I saw the busy agenda and I and we were on the second one so I was just hanging outside um we're here tonight with the notice of intent for a proposed detached garage uh measuring 28 by 28 off the back of an existing dwelling um do you mind bringing that up you could touch it think you just did it that's it um just a quick overview of the site uh this is a 150 by 300t um lot we have Wetlands to the north and wrapping around the Eastern portion of the site there's an existing home shown up front uh this wet box is our proposed 28x 28t detached garage The Proposal um is to allow some separation between the existing home to maintain the existing walkway as well as utilize the driveway space that's existing as Crush Stone uh so the proposal is to be as close as 28 ft to the resource area right in this area um erosion control is going to start at an existing shed basically paralleling the edge of existing driveway up to the road that's a relatively flat site already previously Disturbed area uh within the buffer zones so um basically that's that's our proposal we did get uh some comments back from the review stating that they considered the Wetland line to be very conservative um we're not really trying to move that around but um basically based on the comment letter we would be more like 50 ft where it's really wet but our proposal is uh 28 ft off the wetlands as shown that's the line you sh me yep yep that's the line right there as delineated um by Brook Monroe um lot disturbance is approximately 1,000 square ft all occurring within the 100t buffer uh as previously noted it is existing driveway um previously Disturbed areas uh the site is not in a flood zone um based on the topography and existing features of the law not really any other place to practically put this so it does put us within jurisdiction um of the the Conservation Commission so uh I guess at this time we'd open it to any questions or concerns okay thank you I'm going to open it up to the board um is King any questions on this I don't know if you had a chance to do a site visit is there a way to make it smaller so you're not so close to the wetlands okay let me get before we get into that let me just make a U K and I did a site visit not at the same time the the wetlands line is very deceiving um what I saw out there is is this is barriage Pond if you can correct me um this is barage Pond here and I didn't actually see the flags but I thought they were looking at the BBW from the barage Pond but this area in here is very very flat an area here is a walking path that goes out beyond the pond um it's a relatively flat area um I think that line uh and I'm not a Bist um you know these two the ecosystems and and then will determine where that line is but I think the line on the plan is not really descriptive of what's actually on the ground so ecosystems went out and did a um um an analysis and I think they're going to agree with us so um in the order of conditions and I'm not saying that it's Mr tle responsibility to do it but is there a way to ask fishing game or the homeowner if it is his responsibility to ref flag that area as part of the conditions because it really should be flagged um if if you can explain to me what the advantage of is ref flagging I mean we've got you got a situation you got a garage there's no place else to put it I think the line itself as they depicted it is very very very conservative and Kathy can either agree or disagree um I don't really see an issue I I think that whole area back there and there's there's I don't know if the plan shows it but is isn't there a stone somebody put stones there or something to keep the driveway together somewhere in this area uh yeah that's correct it's some minimal stone wall retaining for the driveway um and all your activity is is that the stone wall here I can't yeah so it's kind of tough to see we show like a rippley um that's the tree line and the stone basically comes right up to that so our proposed work is all occurring you know within the cleared limits um as mentioned changing the line and re flagging it um based on the report it's only going to push the Wetland line back and appear to give us more separation so this is a very conservative worst case approach um we did kind of scale in the existing Wetland line from the site plan from 1990 which shows the wetlands way back here so there's some spots that's a a 50t discrepancy so um you know the Wetland analysis it does change a little bit over time but it's you know it's it's the professional's opinion of where it is so it's not going to be the same for everyone so we kind of took this as a worst case approach and that's the numbers were going off of if I could just do just to get your question answered um I'll have Brendan just come up and speak to the report for some reason I don't have the report I do remember you want to pick through the report just identify yourself and um they can tell you what they found out there and then you can continue on with motion okay uh again my name is Margaret bacon I'm a weapon scientist and licensed engineer and I did the uh the site review last week and uh so we did did review the uh the line and there is a walking path um walking path yeah comes through here and this Wetland was on the upgradient side of that walking path and so that kind of got our attention in uh so so looking at the vegetation you know a lot of the uh the vegetation with Upland species and then we did a lot of uh soil samples you know right along Ong that line and all the soil samples were coming up gold and I actually you know included one in the peer review report just to document every area along that Wetland line was definitely Upland soils and a lot of the Wetland plant or the the the vegetation even uh based off of the uh the consultant's um own letter were a lot of Upland plants so it really didn't meet the criteria of a wetland this far up nor we going to so you just looking at it and we just kind of you know roughly paced off so anywhere from 20 to 50 ft back that you probably could have moved that that Wetland line um so with that said uh we also looked at where the proposed garage is going and we agree there's really no other practical location for that garage and you know minimal disturbance and uh so we look at this and you have two options the Wetland flag could either be ref flag but I always have concerns flagging on other people's or property you know some people don't like their property with butland Flats on it um knowing that this is the worst case scenario what shown on this plan um and there's really going to be minimal to no disturbance uh for that garage construction and I think the the closest spot to the Wetland they said 28 ft it's probably greater than 50 ft so I think that you know you could go ahead and prove the plan as is but just not confirming that Wetland line or option two is have them uh you know go out there and take another look at that Wetland line and relocate it but I don't know is there gain okay yeah is there anything to gain would make any difference relocating the line no no okay Miss K I want to share this with the rest of the board in figure two on the notice of aent it says they have estimated habitats of real wildlife and certified Venom pools and PRI priority habitats of rare species would wouldn't be uncommon especially a buding barage but I think that that's important for the board to take into consideration I have to apologize that's not barage Pond is it that is bures I think bures down further down further so I I have to apologize for that I saw the pawn in the walking and bar got stuck on my head Mr chairman Brandon can system Solutions um should we we do a comprehensive review not just the Welling boundaries but all other critical areas you know like estimated habitat priority habitat zones uh outstanding resource Waters ACS etc etc and I don't remember this being within an estimated habitat am I crazy I don't have that map off hand um you said it was not or it was it was I'm passing down the map what in our fold or now yeah well if if that's the case if it's an estimated habitat the procedure is to uh send natural heritage and dangered species program uh a copy of the notice of intent they then have 30 days in which to do a review and make a determination of take or not take there is a notice for National Heritage in there and signed by Mr um and the homeowners so I don't there's no information from National Heritage in the file yet so I don't know if that's completed so I think it has been sent to them but we have not received any comment back okay so natural heritage has 30 days right so if they don't comment with 30 days you have the green light uh to move forward but if they don't commission should really uh refrain from issuing an order of conditions until natural heritage made that determination because their their determination will will have impact on the water absolutely so go ahead would it be fair to have everybody make their comments ask questions and then ask that it be continued until after the 30-day period so we can give National her their due diligence I agree but let's find out when that 30-day period was you I don't have the notice of intent in front of me um I is this the one we needed a correction on a page it is and it is corrected in this one okay the date of the filing June 5th 2024 it was received to us G four 43 is also June 5th so it wouldn't be after the four 4th it would be July 5th would be the 30 days okay from when Town Hall received it and it was sent out from the admin I apologize for missing that don't know how but um the July 9 meeting would be right after 30 days and if you haven't heard from natural heritage move forward I get a feeling that it's going to be a not take with more conditions but we'll see M CL had a question yeah my my comment I was sort of agreeing with Kimberly that uh red delineating might be beneficial not for you necessarily not for a homeowner necessarily but for future applicants because if it really isn't that close to the wetlands then you know people will expect us to to approve based on what we've done in the past and if we're approving based on 28 ft um distance when it's really 60 ft um that would be confusing to Future applicants and I'm just curious how expensive it is to Red delineate the Wetland area well okay um it I know that's a relevant question I don't know that it's appropriate um I I guess I'm going to have to defer to these two gentlemen um you got a disagreement on the line the line is further um I guess there's there's colums want to come out and red delineate it or pick up new Flags that's going to be an expense um I think one of the concerns is is that where the building is now and that um Wetlands line or The Limited work line that somewhere in the future the owner or owners aren't going to be coming back to us looking to remove some additional vegetation I think that's part of one of the conversations that we held um if that's the case and they move the line back then they can I guess cut what they want um I'll look for General consensus I just I don't know that it it makes that much difference the the board in the past just to although we're not responsible for federal laws in the past we have required it as a board and just to stay consistent is why I asked the question and the fact that potentially and I definitely defer to whether or not National Heritage has comments or doesn't have comments for my general contestment cuz that would weigh heavily for me but I think it would be beneficial just to have the Wetland so we know that there's not fertilizers going into it there's not pesticides going into it that everybody knows here's my Wetland side and I'm almost sure by federal statue and I'll have to triple check it is that it has to be flagged and often often times living in New England I mean they disappear it's hard to keep them flagged 247 365 I recognize that but I think when they're before us we should ask them to to do it I mean even if they allow the home homeowner to do it and not necessarily hire an engineed air company it's a condition as long as it's met okay I don't know that we could have a homeowner come up and we delineate the f the flags I'm going to just defer the comments from the review um I I don't um you guys have been on the site I looked at the site M Evans has looked at the site um here my suggestion if if there's uh a real um concern about getting the well boundary correct right because let me tell you this is an unusual situation I'm usually saying the wetlands there's more Wetlands not less right but we just we wanted to point it out basically the point was is that um we we wanted to say that yeah we think the Wetland line is conservative it could go further back but you know what they're proposing here isn't the worst thing we've ever seen But if you want it ref flag we as the peer reviewer we can go out there and put our up our recommended flag locations because that's part of our job and and we have it in the budget to do that so um you know it's already paid for so instead of having Miss Monroe come back out and she may not agree because you know it's her line she's going to be she's probably proud of her line right so getting to go in either direction can can be difficult but we we can go out there and and put flags up where we think it is and then Collins can locate the flags and minimize the uh the cost burden to the applicant I that'd be great and um Mr Webby just handed me an idea of just doing the delineation near the new garage only part of the line which two may or may not be beneficial no I I agree in keeping the delineation on this property and not the adjacent property yes so it looks like we got a general consensus would you you like to make a motion to continue it along with that motion that the flags within the properties the homeowners property uh would be um rechecked and that Colin engineering would update the plan to reflect those particular Flags if that's what the commission wants I move the motion as written okay said so we have a motion and just to be clear um um those flags um just bear with me I can't see would be flagged it would be from that flag got it the wrong way that flag there 21 like n n nine to this one yeah like 17 okay so 9 to 17 would be uh adjusted so we have a motion do I have a second a second okay so we have a motion in a second um all in favor I I okay that motion should have included that we're going to reconvene this on July 9th sorry about that I thought it was going to take a all less okay next item on the agenda is 8 Hill the lane roadway theep number SC 171 0574 it's continued hearing Joe Joe Webby Webby engineering and uh we're here on a continued hearing for the roadway at ill the lane uh we were started this project back I think back in November uh with the planning board uh to do a modification to the the approved subdivision which ultimately uh the the planning board asked us to then come to the Conservation Commission uh before we before we went any further with planning board and then when we got into conservation uh we got into natural heritage and natural heritage took a little while to ultimately uh issue order of conditions that we had given you I think in the last time I was here uh so basically uh right now we're looking at uh peer review from ecosystem the subdivision you to change that you to change it I I think you just touched the tab at the top but that uh yeah said M20 Hill the lane M20 when I was looking earlier I couldn't find the one is that the one I think it's it's got to be this one right those are the only L okay here it is is that that's the one well that's this is um this is the individual lots that we also filed uh oh I'm sorry there's one more over to the right no I'm sorry that's Hayward not Hilda I think that that was it for Hilda so I I do have the the old style old do we still have the eil or no will it sit on on the screen is enough for to put that up there Jo or you [Applause] need yes so this this is Hill the LAN uh as it is now it's currently a a gravel roadway that was approved by by the planning board and ultimately it it used to be 1,000 ft and we we've U gone for a site plan or subdivision modification to reduce it down to about 500 ft and create four Lots originally I think we had seven Lots they were crowed up in here so we've uh modified the subdivision down to four lots and um you know Echo System went out there to review the lines uh we have some some of their comments I think that the couple of ones that I think off hand was whether whether or not there's a uh flood zone in this area and then we have a little bit of River Front comes up this area that we have and then there's probably going to be an intermittent stream someplace up in here uh that we have uh sent your report to uh the Bracken at sebacea and he's investigating that so we we still have some some work to do uh we just received this I think 5:00 last night or so yeah but I I think that one good thing is you agree with the uh BBW one other comment I I know Pat Brown was here a little while ago uh but uh he's ring the drainage for the planning board anything else based on the fact that we just got to review can you take just a few minutes to um go over what the review comments were and what we can expect because we are going to have to continue this we we don't have Brandon F of ecosystem Solutions Mar bacon EOS some solutions again um so uh we be engineering so the three nois and so the one we're talking about right now is just for Hill the lane so we we tried to keep our comments so you can see that the that the property lines are are all close to the Wetland resource areas so you'll see in all our comments some of the comments are redundant like we did go out there and we walk the entire Wetland line and all Flags uh they did a nice job and uh so I didn't see any areas where that needed to be adjusted um but just keeping it to Hill the lane um just the yeah exension the culus act the really the the only uh you know comments are is you know since we are this property is right in this area right here is where that potential Vernal pool okay the area right there yes yes and you'll you'll you'll notice that that comment in all three of our reviews for each one of these blocks because it's right there so that's one of our uh comments and this possibly being an intermittent stream and then the uh flug plane elevation of 28 I think that came up more for this lot 2T but back to uh just the cue Act uh our comments are you know work uh is shown outside the 100e flood plane um so like I say that that would have to be further you know looked at by you at that elevation 28 oh yeah and then also too we get into talking about the amount of wetland impacts here due to this this um this crossing here but we'll talk about that on the other the other two five minutes yeah right Mr chair you on on this site plan it shows the whole thing it shows the the CU theck extension the storm water uh Basin easement it also shows the two lots so it gets a little confusing because this application is supposed to be focusing on H the lane and the storm water associated with it but we're still showing the cross but still showing both house Lots so my suggestion is if we already have nois for the Crossing in each individual house lot maybe I'm just talking out loud here maybe we remove this the the two house lots and the Crossing from this plan we just focus on the the road extension and the storm water because we're going to be getting back to this with those two other nois because when you add these to this plan it just makes things confusing what what are you approving in this one what are you not approving so you know I just want to make sure that that things stay is consistent as possible and can I ask a question sure the Vernal pool is that would that if you just limited this to Hill delay is that Vernal pool going to be impacted by the road the proposed construction is the veral pool uh have any impact on the proposed road construction no no so that would be more if you're going then further into developing the other Lots right hopefully there'll be no impacts over there and anyways that potential veral pool is within the uh the RightWay of the roadway so that's why we included in these comments so is the proposed Road in Lot number 2T no well yeah that I'm sorry no I was just asking because there's comments from the Department of vial protection in this report in front of the board and it and in the report but it's specific to Lot number two t and it says per D the proponent should demonstrate that the proposed Crossing follows the mass division of ecological restoration stream Crossing handbook and the mass River and stream Crossing standards to the maximum extent right yeah right right now we're on the roadway that that comment is for the for the crossing for uh 4T and 2T I do know it's been said that this is on t uh when we put that on originally for the planning board presentation uh the assessors told us that we can't use ont because the whole lot right now happens to be ont so we immediately have to change it to so that's that's our that was our so so you can maybe understand my comment about taking the the shared driveway and the two lots off of this plan so there's no confusion Mr Webby yeah it's fine it's okay it's just shutting off a few layers in the computer that's no at this point any members of the board any more questions I do um this report has and this one's labeled and correct correct me if I'm wrong this one to the board is for a Hilder Lane proposed subdivision Road and this one has comments for the Wetland resource areas within it um if anyone from the board would like to see it and then pictures and comments on the v in the riverfront I I think I did this is from ecosystem I didie that I did too yeah so my question was it's now you're saying within the roadway the roadway to be built the proposed roadway there is a potential Vernal pool in that area correct just right up in here okay so so the the pavement associated with over Lane is going to stop about right here uhhuh but you see this line is the the full easement pH sack does go up into the area we saw a potential mural pool okay and also the potential intermittent stream right which see how this is narrow MH um this was flagged as BBW but it's it seems to me and Margaret that this flow at least some time of the year running in this direction there is a connection in it says it in the uh the report from the uh the Wetland scien flag yeah thank you so right so this heads down in the flood plane if you look at the the FEMA map it shows the flood plane elevation is elevation 28 and I think this is a very important part because I've spoken to some of the directive Butters and they're very very concerned about flooding and and the flood plan issue was not addressed in this uh noi at all so I thought it was very important to bring it up and you know I'm just looking at the the elevations that are shown here and we have an elevation 28 right down in this area so one of my questions was uh what was what was your protocol for you know determining the elevation where the benchmarks used etc etc is this an assumed elevation or this is this mean c level that we're using when did the nav 88 so na 88 then what are we on we're still on na 88 still nav okay yeah this is uh not on mean SE level uh this was the original Contours that were submitted and approved by the uh the planning board for the original subvis okay so we we're holding the Benchmark that was on that plan uh we can obviously check now and get on compare the benchmarks to na8 and then see where we are to to fit with the that would that would be great so my question is um it looks like there's a lot of updating that needs to be done and how do we assure that the potential brunal pools are certified if they are certifiable how do we assure that before it moves to any further stage so also in this report um if I may go sh states that National Heritage has already been out and they've issued an take an order of conditions with take with conditions and their was dated April 1st 2024 for Lots 1T and 7t so some of these areas and questions already may have been addressed by National Heritage because they've already been out I'm going to direct that though and so when I was reading the the take with conditions letter by natural heritage it specifically referenced Lots 1T and 7t so I guess the question to Mr Webby now because he just stated that the original Big Lot was called ont is that ont the whole lot or is that now a subset no yeah um when we file with natural heritage natural heritage assumes that we don't do any subdividing they have to look at the whole site at that time it was so that's what they review so the whole thing so before development right so so so with that with the ont being the entire lot that said they've covered the whole area so take with the conditions with the requirement for an Eastern Box Turtle protection plan so what's going to happen is the entire perimeter of the construction site is going to get rimmed with Sil Pence or they call tural Protection barrier just Sil get towed in and then uh a pre-qualified uh Turtle biologist is going to have to go in and do what's called a turtle sweep and take any turtles that are inside the work area and put them outside the work are on the other side of the sil fence so they can't come back in yeah one question I have we are working on the roadway if you're doing a turtle study you're going to do a turtle study on the entire project the entire project because the entire yeah I just wanted to be clear because if you put a Sil fence around there you just want to make sure when can do the same thing for the other two particular Lots so that that's okay well these two lots here you know lots 3T 1 T 2T 7t 4T they were all part of the original one t so uh natural heritage does not allow you to uh subdivide U what you call it yeah so you have you have to look at the whole project as as holistically so there there will be a a s fense that probably starts down here by this uh proposed house in the drainage easement go fils The Limited work all the way up and around and all the way back down okay and your client's prepared to do that he's got whoever doesn't that's the Turtle Point Turtle protection point so I don't think that it will go follow way around I think wherever our limit of work is so I think it's probably going to be like Brandon said from here all the way down to here and then all the way down to this house and then and then the construction entrance there's going to have to be a temporary bar barrier that goes up every night so the turtles can't sneak around and come in through the the entrance I'm not kidding I I after constructions ended in things and correct me if I'm wrong but don't the turtles come back and lay their eggs and such historically in the same places every year yes so personally I'd like to see a turtle protection plan go forward even after construction because they're going to rechart to to certain to certain areas and we have requested it in the past just just for discussion yeah yeah well after after construction you just take the uh still fenc down and then the turtles can go wherever they want uh some of this has to be done offseason right I have to get the dates is April to October something like that right the the uh you can't do the uh Turtle protection barrier certain times of the year because they they hibernate in the winter time so they're going to be underground and you're not going to find them so you have to do the protection barrier in the turtle sweep during the the active season when they're walking around so you can actually see them walking around and pick them up because they burrow and if you do it in the winter time you're not going to find them right yeah in part of your in part of the uh your review I think you did mention the turtle plan and then then it looked like you you'd mentioned a bunch of scrip errors yeah R in high all right were there any other issues you just so that the commission's clear we're going to someone's going to provide us some information on us to well whether or not elevation 28 is mean C Level or n vgd or I might have it back well how accurate is okay compared the accuracy of the okay that's fine and that's going to be placed on a revised plan and it's Mr wey's intention to eliminate the roadway from this plan and submit that particular plan now will that affect the noi finally I think we also submit well that doesn't help either that has the other on no we'll just rip this down to just the roadway okay will that affect your filing as far as the noi with longitudes and latitudes no okay so I have one one last question also in the report and I don't know if Mr webby's provided it um I didn't see it in all the folders there's four folders for this guys um that they do an impact and avoidance statement um which is required has that already been done and submitted to us I think that's I think that's when we get to The Crossings okay okay okay so at this point we need to make some adjustments to the plan and I think before we continue the meeting I'm going to ask for any comments from the audience but just bear in mind that we do not have an official plan um but okay what I'm going to do oh I'm sorry can I make one quick question yes um when you do change when you do um make these adjustments can you add the certification the Vernal pool to it it's yeah to answer that question we don't know if it's certifiable yet oh okay just we we saw some some open water in an isolated pool um it's probably part of the Run of intermittent stream but part of the the definition of the Vernal pool is that it can have it vernal pools can have permanent inlets but they cannot have permanent outlets right because if it has a permanent Inlet and Outlet then it's really a perennial stream and you're more likely to have fish and that's a very important part of vernal pools is that they have to be fish free right so um this thing when we when we saw it in May and uh and June um it the the the outlet was there was nothing coming out of it so it's just a question that we're asking um and uh is it even certifiable so some kind of study is going to have to be made if you so wish so just a point of information this Ral pool is not going to be within any of the limit of work for the roadway correct it's that's really going to come into play for the Lots 2T and 4T in the crossing you other questions so as a general consensus of the board um I would assume that will be requested a peer PE peer review for that area of the Venable in the future that that would be with up up on the top when we make it to the next two two tailes off of the roadway okay I'm not quite following that so we're taking off two of the Lots just to adjust the roadway but in the future when we go to discuss the Venom pools would it be the consensus of the board that we were going to request the peer viiew study for find out whether or not it's certifiable they will provide you're going to provide the the information on the veral pool as part of his um contract with if you so wish I I can give my my observations and recommendations that's fine I don't know if the applicate is going to agree with it but uh we didn't do that now we're also getting past the ver pool season right so that makes it a little bit tougher other questions okay we you have something else yeah yeah for for us to show where this veral pool a potential veral pool is it it has to be flagged by somebody obviously sebia I would assume would go out there look at it first uh and then we would survey it locate it put it cuz we don't know we know that it's within the blue we just don't know how big it is is as big as this room or you know have we don't know that right now I have a picture of it in the report I I saw it's not very big yeah I saw that is this the the project you've had red delineated the delineation expired a number of years ago and just had it red delineated is this the right P it's this been the wetlands been rechecked with within the last year or so on this particular project I remember one of the me yeah we uh when we submitted to you I think we we had lost the three years by maybe two months or a couple of months so you had asked for it to be red delineated and then uh we hired sebia to go back out there they had done it originally and I I don't know the date I can obviously look it up but then that's the line that they have reviewed friend would would the Seas recognize that veral pool in their Wetlands lineation they can they can flag around the the mean high water mark of of of the pool MH but uh they may um come up with a different conclusion to me as to whether or not it's a certifiable Thal pool with anyone On's lag adjacent to that the puddle let you I saw the picture I didn't have any idea as to where it was um that it's near flag 1-25 being being that area so right basically this this little elbow right here right there so I guess the biggest question is the certification whether be certified or not would it have an impact on the roadway construction we are going to do that uh that's what the board want as far as the hild the Lane Extension in the storm water my an to that is no that's going to come the the Vernal pool isue is going to come into play with lots 2T and 4T okay okay any any other questions from the board um no but when we do have letters from A Butters to read in when we get to their chair okay I am going to um is there any other comments from the the engineers um do we have any comments from the audit yeah okay Mr B I'm going to have to go to the microphone we we have three three issues so now just we'll keep your comments to the roadway issue okay okay so do you want me to read my letter is that what you like me to do um is your letter in regard to the the roadway or is it to the whole project um I believe you read it um it I included all three in the letter so I can read it three times if you like no no so she also has um pictures she provided to the board correct okay yeah in the email one they weren't labeled properly I guess so I printed them all out today and labeled what they wereing to so just identify yourself for the record and if you want I mean we've read the record we've read the letter it's lengthy if you want to fa appraise it or you want to read read the whole thing it's up to you um call if you don't need me to read it I don't need to read it um why don't you just quickly paraphrase it that you know you my name is Dian Bradford at 131 Hayward street we're in a butter of the property of hild Delane which is up for notice of intent hearing for three different matters which we all know the three different matters um all of which they want to construct a roadway and that of two separate single family dwellings with Associated site breading utilities septic systems driveways Crossing within 100 ft of the bordering vegetated Wetlands our home is set on the corner of Hayward and Hill Bain number 131 Hayward street we've lived here since 1987 over 37 years we have lived here with the notice that the road on Halifax and Hill the lane along with the properties of the abutters have more and more problems with flooding and deterioration the river that runs through this property has overflowed and the drainage on the streets during rainstorms has become very great problem which you will all see in your pictures um in our property alone we have had flooding in our three Season room and just recently we went to put a new pool liner in and when the liner was taken out we found issues with the cement from the water beneath the pool which took many days of pumping the water rout for the pool concrete could be repaired on the back corner of our lot we have a section of trees which were it would never flooded before and now they're flooding the trees are in Jeopardy it seems like the water level is getting higher and higher I am very concerned that if this board grants permission for this road and houses to be built that close to the wetlands it's only going intensify the issue of flooding I do believe that if there were request for this did not interfere with the wetlands and were within the bylaws then none of us would be here tonight expressing concerns but since the bylaws are in place for a reason and one such reason is to protect the wetlands and not to harm no harm to come to the homes around the said project then I am asking for the conservation committee not to give the variance of any three projects app your approval many people have asked to build on this wetland in the past and never have they been able to do so um there's endangered species which we've talked about and never has the water table been such a problem as it is now please take our concerns as taxpayers for many years and not let any more damage be done to this area I've attached many pictures that will show the damage that has been done to the roads in the property thank you B and Mark Bradford okay before you sit down I think you submitted eight pitches how many I think eight probably them and show them do that okay you submitted eight pctures which we will accept uh I don't know if any members of the audience want to see the pictures or any of the um and we'll we'll incorporate that into into our any other robs uh regarding the Poland roadway yes okay I I have a question excuse me if you want to go to the microphone identify yourself please yes um I wanted to ask um National Heritage through the chair um when do you have to flag in order to do turtle protection so meaning like how many how many year is there a certain guideline on how that Turtle protection is put up you said not to be done in the winter is there certain prep work that needs to be done and is there um work that like so when you flag the protected land whether it be Mesa or National Heritage how long is that flagging good for okay appears to be multiple questions and pres I'm going to have to rely on um your expertise to answer whichever one of the questions you can okay so the uh the active season for the box turtles is May 15th through October 15th so between October 15th and May 15th in the the fall winter and early spring um you cannot do um the construction you have to put up your turtle it's not so much flagging it's you have to put up the the turtle protection barrier and then do the turtle sweep between May 15th and October 15 when they're active and they're they're moving around you can see them and pick them up and move them because if you do it between October 15 and May 15 likely to be hibernating and you're never going to see them so that when the big yellow machines come in they get crushed that make sense yes okay so do you have another question just address at the Go please oh so you're saying that somebody would have to put up the barriers between May 15th and October 15th am I hearing you correctly not quite the barrier can go up at any time with the sweep for the turtles to make sure that their amount has to happen between May 15 and October 15 yeah when you're doing a sweep when does that specifically have to be done in order to put up the barrier does it need to be within one year 2 year 3 year 2 months okay um I think we're getting a little far off here the I want the question answered I can answer it in the hallway the I think the parties have agreed they're going to do a turtle study I just there's already Turtles there we know that there's Turtles there there agreement that you're going to do a turtle study or you're going to do the turtle turtle sweep yeah this is all this is all it's not so much an agreement as a a a uh condition of the theal Misa permit natural heritage a absolute requirement okay EXC just so and based on that you are going to be our eyes on whether the turtles have the proper amount of protection that's your call Mr chairman you could put that in an order of conditions okay right but then that that would require for the 53g M right so but that's we'll get to that when we get to that so that let her finish okay any other questions what for the no no she's still at the mic so I wanted to hear what she has to say okay are you finished why don't you sit down and then Kim can well I was hold on hold on any have you answered all your questions Mr tro no you have not okay once you let her finish and then you can go ahead okay another question I am asking when a sweep needs to be done in order to put up Turtle barriers um I think she's Mr chair if I may let let answer and then you can go ahead the turtle barrier has to go up before the sweep is conducted and the sweep is done before any ground is broken whatsoever on this this property for construction for clarification to for them to do the turtle sweep it should be started and completed no later than one uh it should be started no earlier than May 15 and ended no later than October 15 okay and and this is these are all things that are going to be in the total protection plan in the Misa determination okay I think for the general populace I think I think they're just looking on clarification and education on exactly how these things work and operate and I think as a board to stop them from asking questions to be educated is wrong of the board to do so okay and I think we should allow the general Po's questions even if they go extended some because they need the education to understand what we're doing up here as the board and all the documents that are in front of us and I really just think that the general and M troop are looking for detailed education to understand what's before us today and I think that we should really allow the experts and the boards to answer these questions for Miss troop and the general populace okay you you're it's it's duly noted we have I think five more hearings I think the turtle plan will be discussed at one of our next hearings because I'm not familiar with the turtle plan so somebody needs to Educators so um the turtle plan as far as I know Mr chairman Mr Webby can confirm one way or another I don't think that's been written yet no it has right so that that has to be written so that's perhaps something that the applicant should work on so okay M I have one question M um through you Mr chair to our experts when it's written um and comes to us um would you mind if if well my qu the chair let me reward this so it makes a little more sense to everybody so when it comes to us even before we discuss it is it automatically public information be because I do feel that the general populace is going to want to read that Turtle Plan before coming to this to the board and a meeting and I'd also recommend the day that we're having that meeting that we have extra copies of it available for the general populace okay just one point we had the same explanation a few weeks ago with Thorn properties they explained I honestly do not know um and we didn't request anything in writing from them if there is a plan that needs to be done then that should be made available to the office and then it would be you know uh available it the turtle plant statue it's required from National Heritage it has to be done but I think it would answer a lot of questions and having those extra copies available to the general populace would be extremely beneficial is there is going to be report submitted um whoever want answer yeah so so I just you know like I just said um Mr Webby um stated that the turtle protection plan does need to be created natural heritage does not care the turtle CL goes to the Conservation Commission you have to care if it goes to the Conservation Commission because they they're a separate agency right yeah so the way the the the 310 cmr1 works when we're regards to endangered species is that natural heritage is in charge of the natural the the endangered species and that if natural heritage says that there will not be adverse impact to rare or endangered species the commission may uh accept that unless there is what's called a clear uh clear evidence to the contrary okay so it's really the burden is now on the Conservation Commission to say I think that natural heritage is wrong and the project should be denied because you're going to have adverse impact on rare species so you can presume that natural heritage is correct and it's going to be a no take as long as they do these conditions the turtle protection plan um or you know if you find evidence to the contrary the burden is now on you to say why you think natural heritage is wrong no yeah thank you for your exclamation to the board too um I'm I'm used to it from serving as a special State commissioner with mosquito control and working with National Heritage so closely especially during state of emergencies the turtle plans and all those other things but the education to the board has been wonderful from both yourself and Joe tonight and I greatly appreciate it and as one conservation member and I can't speak for the other members I want to see the turtle projection plan I think there's a general consensus that the plan should be followed absolutely all right I have one more question yes when does a uh Turtle sweep expire the the uh Turtle sweep number one in order for the turtle sweep to remain valid the turtle protection barrier AKA silk fence has to be uh up and in good working order at all times right so if it's found that the turtle protection barrier fell down or um they have to be towed into the ground so there's no separation between the the the ground and the top of the sil if it's found to be flapping underneath that means that a turtle could have gone through so if if that's found uh uh some kind of a defect in the turtle protection barrier any time during construction you can presume that the The Sweep is now invalid and you have have to do a a new sweep I think our question was was when it's it's it's a valid it's a during the time that the fence is up correct and which is also the time that the permit from natural heritage and the order conditions from the Conservation Commission is also valid right so as soon as the permits expire you have to start all over again just for some clarification yeah you're asking you mentioned about order of conditions are you saying that this project either needs to be approved or not approved the order conditions issued and then you're doing the turtle sweep no it doesn't cuz you're you're saying about order conditions wa well the plan has to be to you before you issue an order but the sweep won't happen till after May 15th or October 15th between those dates do we have any other questions from the audience okay um I think I'd be looking for a motion to continue on this particular one and I'm going to have to defer to Mr Webby as to um how long it's going to take you to do that uh we've got stuff scheduled July 9th you want to continue till then um it's your pleasure when is your next date I know July 4th is going to come into there uh I think July 9th July 9th is the next I thought it was the 19th it's not the 19th it's the I don't have the schedule if it's give us another two weeks from okay I'm looking for a motion to continue oh excuse me Mr CH I have one last question mhm on the photo submitted the one um that's full water damage hold on what I'm going to have to do is Miss Bradford will you took the pictures do you mind on this one I'm just just if you don't mind just getting up to the mic and you can respond I saw that picture um and then the they're not dated um just for the record we've had an extremely high water table the past two years um but my question just for the pool and the water damage is how do we know that it's Hill a lane and the access of water and the project that's directly causing the damage to your pool and not previous neglect or not upkeep and things like that to the pool like I'm struggling okay as a commission member to see 10 years ago we did a liner and there was no damage done to the cement I'm taking it from the pool installer and you know did the liner they were amazed at how much water was underneath and the cracks so I can only go by the person who was in there installing the liner and how long he had to pump days and days to get the water from underneath I don't know and then they did came in and they fixed the concrete so my husband told me to take a picture um I can go and get the dates that I took the picture off my phone if you'd like them uh no I was just did those who did the work for the pool write you any type of report to back up that but I could bring it for next time if you'd like I'd like to see the experts do because before I make I want to take your concerns than into consideration but I'd like to do it to fairly to all parties so I think that I can get experted end of it would be helpful to the board okay I don't mind and I'll bring it or get it to you before yeah I can have them I'll get a hold of the full installer is does the rest of the board have any objections to that I I don't anything I don't I think anything wrong I I do any of the other question yeah I do have one other question okay in relationship to the proposed activity in the swimming pool any idea how far that would be from your property your the swimming pool so let me just make sure we got this right so that is that your house there yes it is okay and where's your swimming pool right in back okay so based on I can't see the scale is that a 30 scale I think that one's a 6 excuse me that's a 60 scale is it is it can you m Mr Webby tell us just give us an idea or it's it's a good 2 in so I would say about about 100 ft away from okay so your pool is about 100 feet from where the proposed construction is um well how many um feet did you need between the house and the road before you know and you you did the engineering for our house let me let me grab let me grab scale I think just just just a rough question I believe it's 50 ft 50 ft off the street okay the house the house would the house the house would be 50 so right and the edge of our pool is probably maybe 10 ft in from the edge of okay so you're probably 60 ft I mean she's she's got a point but I think she we need to know basically uh I don't have a problem helping this out and I didn't that's why I asked if there was any other pictures of concern and I know that concrete isn't the best material in New England other things have factors um I don't have an inground pool so how long does a liner last and things like that which just it'd be beneficial for me to have that education okay I'll see if they'll do it for me thank you thank you I appreciate it Mr still weby approx uh approximately the house is about 60 ft from Hill the lane and probably another 20 ft send it send it some place okay any other questions for we continue this I don't that was my last question so I'm looking for a motion to continue the 8 Hill the lane roadway hearing until um is it July 19th is that the date I don't have a calendar one in July do you have a I don't have a meeting schedule I don't have it it's in my binder um maybe let me just look at my phone and I might be able to if the 9th is uh um is our next our next meeting then it's the 2 and fourth so so we have so the 23rd 23rd please yep July 23rd y so I'm looking for a motion to continue this matter until um July 23rd 7 p.m. is it only the going to be the roadway to July 23rd all we're doing is the roadway right now okay so I make a motion for 8 Hill the lane to be continued to July 23rd conservation meeting just for the roadway I second okay um all in favor I'm going to abstain from this one okay uh so vote all in favor so it's 3 01 yes okay 301 okay 723 okay um anybody want to take a few minute break I'm okay at the moment you okay yeah I'm okay okay um next item on the agenda um Joe if we could Mrs Al's here and I think she's looking for an update on 341 340 okay I have 341 let me just give you a quick update unless you want to stay um I spoke with Highway today we're still on plan he's talked with the the bid I guess just got awarded so he's going to talk with the engineers for the roadway construction to do exactly what we wanted to increase the center line of the road okay that's that's all I have okay I will have some plans proposed we I just haven't had time but I spoke with with him earlier yeah okay you're welcome to stay but it's 340 341 is St sh that's what I got on my agenda and I think we say it every time okay all right next item on the agenda is eight Hill Lane yeah I would beet map oh sorry no 8 Hill on Lane map 120 lot 2T now this shows as a new hearing is this a new hearing or this continued hearing because my agenda believe it's continued we we submitted uh 2 and P let's say a month ago and at that time it was voted to send it out to a peer review I don't believe you had anybody at that time and then ultimately it got sent out okay all right um mrby would you continue uh let me just ex out of this quick see if we can get back to the screen along okay so this is 2T is this the right plan this is one of the state be the at what we're looking at now is a blow up of just the around the house not the crossing uh so we have the BBW we also have the 50 ft off the BBW then the 100 ft and then okay just just clarification what what are you proposing on law 2T is this for single family single with grading septic system utilities and it all has to be within the delineated Disturbed area because that was what was approved by natural heage so our limit of work is is right around there what what does get involved with both 2T and 4T is the crossing so how do I get to the crossing the next page uh no no I don't want T the next page touch no I don't think yeah okay okay all right I think if you just touch um the screen once it moves you to the next page um over on the right so so so what we've uh we're proposing is a uh basically two driveways that would be touching each other uh going right along the lot line and the reason for having an enlarged Crossing is because of of a couple of uh issues we we're only going to be a lot of one Crossing uh but we also according to the halifa zoning bylaws U if I remember that the each each house or dwelling has to be serviced by its own driveway you have to have its access uh you have to be able to drive your access so that's why we have this is is one Crossing so if we were to try to get the the frontage for 2T is right here so we're exit we're entering uh the property or or this this proposed dwelling right off it its own Frontage and the same with 4T 4T will be entering at the same on their property so so that meet your bylaws um we can certainly write this all up in a in an analysis but basically that's why we we chose this spot uh for the crossing uh when we when we disturb the wetlands in in that area we're going to be proposing to replicate twice two times uh right there along Fort and obviously we we've have our review engineer review done and we're going to need a little time but basically I think that made that and the flood possible flood hazards on in that area I think of the two biggest uh questions is is this is this the replication area yes it is okay um I'm going to turn the floor over to Mr f um you did multiple comments on this so can you um brief on your take on it Brandon F EOS systems bacon ecosystems um our first thought when we out there when viewed this site is uh my question to Mr Webby would be uh why having the Wetland Crossing in this location when you can reduce the amount of wetland impact by by moving it over uh so you you could reduce the Wetland impact by at least 50% if not more and constructibility would be so much easier uh in this location here than right here uh even walking through this area here we had a hard time because there was a lot of uh uh pits and mounds and one to two fet of water you know so but then you come over to this area right here and I put a picture in our review is just a it's a like a a Swale so I guess my question is is can this be moved over there and by moving that and reducing the amount of w impacts this here can be reduced significantly so I see a replication area that's 9,000 square ft that's double of what has to be done but but these in themselves are can be impacts you know you know you're taking down all these trees and then all the grading so that that's a pretty big area you know for a ro you replication and and so my thought is know let you answer can this be Crossing be moved over to a more suitable location Mr I think he he addressed that but let him answer that sure yeah I I believe that common driveways are not allowed in Halifax so that means that we have to access our own Frontage this is this is the lot line between the two lots if we were to move that crossing over then we would lose a lot so is there a reason why the lot lines could have been moved over here yeah yeah it's it's all Frontage and area you know what I mean yeah I do know what you mean so you're telling me if we move this lot line over here you wouldn't get the required Frontage that's correct for the next lot before T right okay and then the the HX planning does not allow easements to is I is I understand the Halifax zoning bylaws uh you can't have a common dry voice it's CRA you have to use your Ownage yeah I'm sure you've been out there and you can see in that location it just makes uh everything a lot more difficult constructing a Crossing in that area if you hold if you hold it um it might it should go back this what I was told so if we clicked it and it went forward if you hold it it should go well that's what I was told that did not work found it scroll the page didn't know and not being familiar with the Halifax's zoning um many times I've designed Crossings where we either had to do we do share driveways easements to minimize Wetland impacts and many time the uh zoning board has allowed that if we could you know demonstrate that impacts have been reduced best of my recollection the planning board deferred the this plan to conservation to see what they're going to be approved uh he's correct you have to access your Frontage um through the lot so Mr chair yes when you're done and others are done I have a question okay is it relative to this particular because we'll address it now because we I'm going to keep it it is I am personally not against the the shared driveway um where my parents lived before they passed they had to go through special permitting and other and other things to be able to do it within the Wetlands but it really did reduce what was Disturbed and it really did protect the wetlands um and once they made it through all the processes it was fairly easy for them and the boards were very supported of conservations request to please do allow the variations so my question is can we as a board ask the other boards to please allow the variance um um and state all of our reasons why which our experts just explained to us rather well and it's very detailed in their report but they also noted in in the report that it's in our discretion um for the project size interest and to be in the best interest of everybody and the environment under ml's chapter 131 and 40 and to to the extent of which the advert impacts can be avoided so we do have the discretion as a board to request that they allow the shared driveway and we have experts that are recommending such um so I just want to know how to properly do it and to see how Mr Webby would feel about readjusting the plan going in front of other board again um okay let me let me ask Mr Webby and you've heard the question um I don't know that the town is ever granted a variance to to access um a lot not within the frontage but you want to address that I would my clients are not here so I can't address that okay I know they're not going to want to lose a lot okay wow you are you asking that they lose a lot no I'm not asking that they lose a lot I'm just asking if they'd be willing to move it a little bit West and H and be able to have a shared driveway I know and I'm only speaking about what I what I know and where I grew up with Mr Webby but it was one road and it had a roundabout at the end and each driveway went off the roundabout and it really minimized the impact to the environment and to the wetlands that's all that I'm requesting is in e systems report they just asked that if you could please move it a little bit to the West they give all the square frontages and then they give the laws that would support it well I I think that if the if the commission uh wrote us a kind of a little nice letter that we could go to the zba with then I would certainly convin try to convince my clients that that would be a good route because it would be cheaper for them um but other than that it's it's going to be against your own by m Mr weby is there some potential relief from the zba not the access your Frontage I mean that's a plan board rules and regulations Oh I thought it was a I thought it was a uh I think it's a it's planning board as far as as far as um as the acis [Music] um what is your client TR TR if you want speak just be recognized do you want I mean is there something you want to speak to your client about I mean I I don't see how it can be done but that's not saying that it can't be done um do you want to address any other issues and um Mr fan ahead thank you Mr chairman I also want to point out and tell me if I'm crazy Mr Webby it's also Frontage on uh South Street that comes into lot 4T um is is that a possibility because then you would still have to cross over this Wetland here but it would be in one of those the narrow spots um right so then it would still require probably a variance planning board or zba to have an easement and not be using the frontage to access lock to 2 T yeah see right there yeah there's also a little bit of wetland right there oh there is yeah we didn't blew it up but it's right there okay so we would have to cross in order to get to one t we'd have to cross here and then cross so there would be two crossings from sou Street see but see this is all part of the what should be in an alternative analysis so because I you know I wouldn't have to be asking these questions right okay so I I understand that maybe the town hasn't seen it done before but I have seen it done in other towns it is statue that allows the town and the correct Town boards to do it I'd like to see if our boards would work together for the betterment in the environment and for those that have applications in front of all of us and and I would like to vote as a board and also get the input of our other professionals here if we can supply them with a letter with the statutes with the recommendations with our already written peir reviews and our statements in front of us today for Mr Webby to be have conservation support for the variants okay just so that I'm clear there's no exess from sub street that was your alternative was C Street so if you were to request a variance from the frontage what difference would it be there because I think your alternative was with South Street so would there be the same alternative would you reduce the that roadway if you shift if you shift acrossing to the West there' be a significant reduction in square footage but we we also have this ISS with the Vernal pool because the veral pool is going to be right there is right there right so that that's something to take into consideration as well because if you shipped it over here you might be uh in a potential Vernal pool now we might decide eventually that it's it's not a Vernal pool investigation which would make it easier to go through here but if it is a Vern pool a Crossing is never going to happen if it gets certified the state does not allow filling of Vernal pool certified vernal pools whatsoever well you can see see right here how you know the wetlands lines you know drops down significantly just a little further to the uh to the east this this is where it starts to become more of the BBW and starts to widen out into the flood plane of Palmer M Brook but this narrow spot right here is more of that intimate and stream coming down so if you can go up here somewhere you you're GNA you know it's currently at 4660 you could reduce that down to like what is it 2500 quite a bit 3,500 per you report yeah you could see 3,500 square feet right so so I want to say sorry that the Conservation Commission has uh wide latitude to allow up to 5,000 square ft of of we call um loss of bordering vegetated Wetland is long as the Wetland is replicated at at least a one: one ratio okay and there's some other minor caveats associated with it but up to 5,000 sare ft no one is going to question your decision that said they're keeping the disturbance here under 5,000 squ ft so if you wanted to you could allow it nobody's going to say boo um but you still have a duty to ask the question are you adequately avoiding and or minimizing your impacts and if you're satisfied with that answer then allow them the 4660 but other but you really you should be asking the question to begin so Mr f are you saying that an alternative analysis would help the board with determining whether that's the only place to put this absolutely yes and if if the board so decides to compel the applicant to request a variance from zba or planning board whatever the board may be uh you have you have that prerogative and and if they come back from zba and and they laugh them out of the room well then you have your answer but it may it may pass you don't know the the I I think that in order for us to send it to the zba we would have to approve it based on conditions would you agree with that say that one more time okay if if we were going to to send the letter to them to the zba or the planning board whoever is going to make that decision um would we have to approve the project or should we approve the Project based with conditions no no this is all before approval occurs because this is part of your decision making process okay and it sounds like the board is becoming more interested in in finding a a different Crossing location that will require at least one of the lots to to have an easement and not be along their own Frontage which I'm learning is not allowed in Halifax but uh it may be worth asking the question it and if it's not allowed in our bylaws I think we need to bring it to the selectman too because it may time to rewrite that one okay um Mr Webby I'm going to put you're going to have to decide on um I think how you want to proceed how many more issues were there I know there was an issue on the location of the Crosser is there anything else major that we should deal with the big issues was really the amount of impacts here which then results in 9,000 square ft of replication over here which I mean if you only need to do one in one one to one replication you can cut those impacts in half and Margaret and I are both of the same mind that less is more when you do wellon replication because this is actually a very nice healthy Upland Forest right here so this is one of my pet peeves actually about the W protection act is that it requires one to one you like you can't get out there's only one instance where you don't have to replicate in this case you'd have to but very often the places that you replicate are very ecologically uh stable and and valuable areas so you end up coming here cutting down wildlife habitat digging a hole and and attempting to create a new Wetland which may or may not take right so if you can minimize that I don't think that the 9320 is necessary you can cut that to one: one in my opinion I think okay just so that I'm clear I know that in past in my read that replication areas have not proven to be quite functional correct it a lot of it depends on the skill of the contractor and the W scientists overseeing the project the most important part of a wedland replication project is something we call the bottom inspection so you cut down the trees you stump it and then you have to dig down into the water table and you have to have some expertise in soil morphology to know when you're finding the Hy of soil lne um and not everybody can do that so would your recommendation be that the replication are be reduced yes and that the applicant seek relief from whether the zba or the planning board on the road or the access to the lot required yes I I know from my own experience I've gone before conservation commissions who requested I do that and so with the support from the conom I have gone back to the zba or the planning board and they've gotten waivers in an effort to you know reduce the amount of we impacts significantly now 20 years ago that probably never would have happened but it's it's it's happening now it seems like you know the the conservation commissions and Wetland uh preservation has a has a lot more power than it did you know 20 years ago Mr weby oh I'm sorry all right so I have a couple questions um knowing whether or not this is a certified Vernal pool will be extremely important before the taking the ne next step right so that I think we we need to make sure that we find out if that's certifiable and certify it if it is so that's my first concern and then my second concern is why that area it sounds like there's a lot of trees there the area for the replication so how many trees and and why that area Mr mby please we chose that area because it's the closest to the uh to the proposed construction you don't want us to go away out the back someplace and start ripping through the forest uh but I do think and I most heartedly agree that we really don't need a two to one rep location one to one would be more than sufficient but that would be up to I think I'm not sure but I believe that's in your regulations the two to one so how because it is in the actual Wetlands that's why it's the two: one because it it abuts the actual Wetland but you're Crossing through yeah part of the uh the performance standard for well in replication is that the replication area has to be constructed along the same hydraulic stretch as the one that is lost so it could it could go over here over here over here you know any one of these quadrants but the thing is this is a completely forested area so it doesn't matter where you put it mature healthy Forest is going to come down and constructed and and if the requirement in the bylaw is for two to one I missed that I apologize I think it's I don't think it's it's not the board had discussed it okay just it would be it's the bylaw if was one of our regulations obviously could be varied I I didn't see it in there but one other it's a one to one but I think reced to one okay if I made just one point and maybe you can check this out when I was out there I noticed on this side it was more mature trees more grading more distur distance if you just take a look over on the other side it's a little flatter less grading much younger you know tree growth not as mature might be a little more suitable location over here uh I I've constructed a lot of replication areas throughout the state and I notice if you you start with a bad location with a lot of grading it's a lot of disturbance and then NE like brand said may not get the success if you don't get the grading just right you know get down to the groundwater so would this be something that would be answered in an Alternatives analysis or would this be um is this a recommendation from the peer review where have you recommended a different spot for this I'm suggesting that you take a look at it that's all because I just think it'd be easier to construct on the other side I may I don't know get back to the road I don't want to impact a lot of the other side on the easly side is the River Front am I correct on the East here that's all the riverfront so one one of my comments is that the the riverfront area is not uh the layer for the riv area is not on this plan it should be yeah and because we have to follow the 200 Riverfront correct you do but here's the thing is that the 200 foot River Front area is is over here so they're not going to be impacting it um back on Hill the lane the drainage eement on lock 3T that's going to be affected and and that's one of my comments on my my other one but up here River Front area really doesn't come in play I'm more concerned about the Wetland replication area where the crossing will go for for overall impacts and the the flood plan issue those are the big big ticket I ask a question yes um so the alter um alternative access alternative yeah yeah where are you thinking is to the left of where that ground pool possibly somewhere you go anywhere further west the Wetland starts to narrow so doesn't really matter where you go is as long as you're going west you're going to have a reduction in Impact but like right around this here here yeah may I I don't like that idea only because that would affect the lot that we have on the other side oh you put the D there yeah yeah there's a lot here that I'm sure that you don't want have impact like we really want to keep it on the maybe we can move it over here some on this if you move East is going to be more impa actually may maybe not so much right here but I don't know is with Joe you're talking about the replication area yes oh I was talking okay I was talking about the driveway okay well driveway I agree with them that the crossing is not the best like trying to meet the the if he moves West it's going to reduces cost significantly if the planning Bo or one of the zva will correct which is going to be the lesser of two evils as far as the impact on the neighborhood to the water table not necessarily to the water table it to the West better because I think that where it is right now is in the is in the 100-year flood plane and if he moves it to the West he's likely to get out of the 100-year flood plane so it's going to be less can you break that down and just show us where the so but you you have the additional lot maybe you need to go to a plan that shows that additional lot no well actually right here I I this Wetland flag uh this is this is this is where you could if you'd have to look into or put that other Crossing in right there and Al it is right right in that area is a little Swale okay over here it's more of a you know it's inundated and and constructibility over here is going to be a whole lot more difficult than over here over here you're going to have to get into de watering uh and uh REM KN removal kna and it just just uh a lot more fill you know so here just the impacts you impacts a lot and and if they within the 100-year flood plane over here and you do this fill you're going to have to do flood plane compensation somewhere whereas if you move it over here you might be out of that okay oh I'm sorry no that's I have a question if they were agreeable and could get approved by all the proper boards in town moving to the West would you still recommend the deed restriction yes I absolutely do that that is whenever you have a real estate subdivision and you're filling in Wetlands um this is part of the water quality certification regulations as it relate to relates the wetlands is that you put a deed restriction on the original lot ont so the original lot 1T and any further divisions of that property uh in perpetuity are limited to a total of 5,000 square ft of fill uh for the the subdivision any future Lots any future driveways it'll be in the de and the reason why that's important is because order conditions come and Order conditions go they expire they get gotten about but when it's in the de and there a deep restriction that lasts a lot longer and is much more visible is it 5,000 ft per lot or the entire the well it per the original lot okay okay so you're allowed 5,000 ft for the original lot and any subdivisions thereof uh was there anything else in your review Beyond this that we should address I have oh just I I have a question they noted that there was confusion on sheet one and Sheet two between Mr Webby and themselves and I just like to make sure that sheet one and Sheet two have been cleared up for ecosystems so there's no confusion on their end oh yeah which one is she one is she too yeah so here so if you look the I had a a it says says she sheet one of two and two of two right so I'm aware I had a a hard copy where this was cut off okay so now I know so I'm good thank you excellent I just wanted to make sure yep and and I'm I believe there was some scripa errors something on a plan that that had been addressed was there anything else in your comments construction sequence um and that approved the applicant provide the commission the approved Eastern Box conection plan uh anything else that you can think of uh those are the big ticket items yeah oh The Limited work erosion control line is not depicted on sheet one so right here so we need a a limited disturbance or limited work line now you have a a proposed uh tree line but we need uh an erosion control/ limited work line that goes that completely encapsulates all work otherwise it's it's an open it's it's open and you're going to have a hard time uh regulating when they when they start going in here and say well there's no limited work okay is there a limited work on the second sheet on the second sheet we do we have we have a erosion control right here is the the line with the little circles right that's your erosion control barrier right but but it should be consistent with both okay and and then the drainage basin um you recommended that there's no disturbance said that there's no disturbance numbers given and no alternative analyst again given um and for new construction um and that these should be provided number you said detention Basin drainage basin are we looking at 2T are we looking at a lane the subdivision can look at the front a held the land proposed subdivision s right that's the one we just had so we we moved on from that one but still valid question that I'm asking Mr web to sorry I've got offer in front of me they can't get you to be a lot okay so I don't have it col it in but the 200 U when s was out there the only bank that they delated for us was this okay so 200 ft from that is right here and it it goes through right in this area where the drainage basin is right again it also goes through right through the middle of the house lot 3 so that that's another one that's going to have to yes so we're going to have to file a notice of intent for that okay so so right now any more questions we're on 2 2 yeah Y which is on the left hand side uh right right side yes 2 T is on the right hand side and 4T is on the left hand side okay good cuz one of the plans I think we looked at we said 4T or 7t or 1T okay you you've made that change um was there anything else you need to have that you want to discuss not not not out lot the rest of it's in the comments okay I'm going to open this up to the ABS oh I'm sorry one more just for clarification from the scientists and professionals here so I know the board has recommended in the past and sometimes I'm on board personally and sometimes I'm not the 211 rati now but as the experts and as the Wetland scientists I just want clarification for myself that our recommendation of that 211 ratio is incorrect and that it just take a look at the regulations there yeah it's one in one it's just something the board's been doing as a and as discussions to write new things so since he brought it up today I'm just looking for clarification as one board there's two philosophies on that the first philosophy is you're required to do uh one to one and and the uh so the success rate is based on one: one so if you do two to one you have a greater chance of having a one: one success rate right and you get more Wetland out of it and it sounds good this second uh way of thinking about it is if you do uh a wetland twice the size you have twice the uh probability of it failing and and then you just took down a nice forest for nothing thank you it it sounds to me that your recommendation we should not we should leave let them leave the amount of trees the most amount of trees and vegetation that we can so one to one would be the the best approach in my opinion not only that but let's think about it from a cost perspective it's it's going to be much cheaper to do only one to one and if they can move the crossing to the West the cost reduction is significant so I'm just here to save people money I'm going to I'm going to open it up to the the audience and then we'll come back to the board to see what action they want is there anybody any first of all did did you provide the office with the list of the butters I'm sure and green cards should have asked that but green cards in there they we gave you green cards I believe at the last okay so fine Mr Webby did turn him in the last hearing and I have I don't see him in this one okay we can we can double check that so I just want to make sure all the butters um were notified and I'm going to take any comments and they in Mr Webby I have them for all but one but that doesn't thank you that's that one Mr chair one one of our comments regarding the abutters you'll notice in that calac certified a Butters list that's only good for three months so Mr Webby might want to get a more up to-date recent a Butter's list and then just verify that you haven't missed any of Butters okay um somebody makeing notes um okay I am looking for any AB Butters that have any questions or concerns on this particular plan um kind of yeah okay just m I'm go up to Y go back them oops so basically the way it is now it doesn't fit right basically is what we're saying I don't think that it doesn't fit he's got it to fit the problem is is that he's trying to minimize the impact on the wetlands you correct me if I'm wrong itally fit better yeah and I have a question on the retention um thing the last meeting you said if it overflows it goes into the river well it goes in that direction just hold on one second do we have a retention Bas on this particular plan that's a septic system no not on this one okay that's I think that's a septic system Mr Bradford yeah there's no no V there's no no retention on this particular plan okay cuz it's right between your house in that proposed house right I think no in 3T it's right in this 3 we're talking about 2T okay up here we're talking about can all right can maybe somebody hit one of the buttons you get that bigger picture I don't think you're going to have it cuz that they didn't put that one up there they didn't put that on there yeah I I think that uh I'm just kind of thinking on my own here a little bit see what to say so we we have to we filed an noi for Hill LAN um so we're probably going to have to amend it to include the drainage basin that's within 200 ft of the river okay so we can easily do that uh with just a letter to ask that this be part of the ont of the Hill the L subdivision roadway this 3T will require his own in this 3T and I don't want to get off base cuz we're talking on the L lot this is the the lot closest to okay so that and we discussed this in the office so that lot would have greater impact on them than the one that's seems to be 6 or 700 fet back yeah in my opinion yeah so you just got the Lots mixed up okay there's no retention on go ahead okay so that drainage Pond I just wanted clarify because that is kind of part of this whole development if it overflows it's going to hurt her backyard and it's going to damage the river and make it higher right if if it overflows it's going to be going toward towards the river all all this surface water is heading in this direction okay will that affect her backyard no well her house here this is going to be kind of Beyond it but there will be an actual Bowl in this area a depression there's one there now that works very well that doesn't this thing hasn't talked if you go there and look if you go take a walk down there Dian you'll see the big hole right there okay we're kind of getting off just just to clarify I just wanted yeah this this hole that we're going to deal with when we deal with that that's probably not going to be changed right yeah I think we I think if we're going to deal with the draes because it's in the r River area within 100 ft then we have to include that in the sub okay now that's not t of this okay um any more comments from the audience all right it sounds to me that we'd be looking for some sort of emotion to provide to the applicant to go to the planning board to see if they can get some relief from one of the particular bylaws that require accessing Frontage on the own lot yeah with the support and based off of the comments of our Wetland scientists from ecosystems okay I I think it's in the best interest of the neighbors that concerns the applicant and the environment okay I'm going to look I'm looking for that particular motion then we'll look for a second just and then we're going to do some discussion I will move it as worded chair okay any second second okay um Mr weby just for clarification um we are not approving this as of yet no no all we're doing is we're going to suggest we're going to letter drafted suggesting to the to the planning board who's already referred this back act to the Conservation Commission I correct um actually we'd have to send this to the zoning board of appeals now just so that I think we have to find out where it's going to go first well first of all is this an approved subdivision the answer is yes okay will the Lan exist on paper does that lot exist on payal no no these Lots the original subdivision I believe had seven Lots okay and so we we we're reducing the road uh road construction and we're also reducing the number of lots well the the problem that I have is that if if in order to get relief on the particular lot you need to have a lot that's created and you're going to get relief from the frontage requirement on that particular lot and what you have here is a proposed plan I mean I I could be wrong maybe I'm overthinking this um maybe the board can give them the zba can give them relief from a proposed plan but it's a proposed plan maybe you can help me with that yeah I don't think there's any way we're going to get relief from frage no no but what what I uh had experience with with uh you have the frontage but they allow an easement over here for a shared driveway so the lot lines stay the same they don't change but they allow a Shar cuz basically that's what this is right here it's a shared driveway you know what is it 24 ft why 12 and 12 I think it's 12 12 and 12 12 and 12 12 is the minimum so we have to put them together right so but that's what that is is a basically a shared driveway so you know leave the lot line where it is but just ask if we could do or if you could they'd allow you to do an easement for a shared driveway you know and then that shared driveway would access which lot it would it would access both Lots both Lots both Lots would both Lots not have Frontage off the accessway they both have they both have Frontage be Frontage of the Lots we got to look at the lot Frontage itself so what you're saying is that right now it appears that the access driveway goes to each indidual lot where are we shifting this thing so we're shifting it over here think you got to Shi it on the other side over here because this is your potential well potential I mean so what either way the impacts would be significantly less and so here here's the lot line that's not changing here's the frontage that's not changing we put a a just a a driveway easement on lot one t that's going to go to one t into 4 t Okay 4T and 2T just so we can't can't see that so the driveway right now is that the lot line right here theer right the center right down the center okay and you would be proposing this driveway to go that way so I just want to be clear because I'm going to have to draft this letter or are you're going to have to assist the drafting La we can assist but I I mean we're investigating if if one of the boards would be open to allow an easement there uh for for two houses and to eliminate you know the excessive Wetland impacts over here okay just a short little easement to to just to cross that little Wetland and get back over onto the other one okay Mr your your um your applicant um is not going to have a problem I mean imagine I don't know what you normally would charge but um we are going to need some assistance and drafting that so long as applicants okay with that then I wouldn't well I would think too you're you know the the owner I mean you know that putting a a driveway over here is going to cost significantly less than there y you know so there there are many benefits for moving that driveway go ahead okay so I still feel that we have a lot of questions to answer before doing that I feel like that might be putting the cart before the horse because there's the option of an Alternatives analysis that has not been done that um is being recommended we don't know if that's a Vernal pool or not we don't know if that's an intermittent stream or not so before we do all of that shouldn't we have the flood plane issue we don't know if the if this is in a flood plane based on what we have here right now I personally would not approve this I would recommend that we deny this so before we draft a letter to the boards to get them to to move this small little piece which is just one small little piece of this project the entire project so far has been the way it's been presented the impact is far too great I feel for us as a board to approve it so should we be doing that should we be putting the cart before the horse and and asking that the other boards to Grant variances when the project the impact of the overall project is so severe with the the road itself just the road itself I is confusing I think we probably would have to defer this to Mr fanf that he's going to provide the commission with a sequence of events to get us to a point where we're going to ask for variance I I agree if there is a veral pool there then that's a major issue then we can't move the driveway right so I think we need to get that established um and then decide if there is a pool now how long will I take to make that determination like see the issue right now is the veral pool season is coming to a close so you'd have to get out there tomorrow pretty and I'm not even going to guarantee I'm going to be able to see what I need to see correct tomorrow um actually next spring I'm going to have to how much you um we're going to need a little guidance here you know we we got a hand respect from um you can put together a sequence of events okay that are necessary um before we get to the point where um the commission gets a point where you compel the applicant to go to the Zoning for appeals okay so you you made that motion U I'm going to suggest that if we incorporate um his suggestion as far as a sequence of events then we've we've ruled out every other alternative and the only alternative would be to request relief from one of the S bylaw I would like to see it discussed as we're doing our due diligence and conservation to give the other boards enough time to research because it's going to be just as confusing to them they may have other things and so that Mr Webby and the owners have enough time also to work together and so the boards have enough time to work together without pushing the project out another year two years 3 years four years because that's also not fair yeah I I think what we do go I think it's already going to be pushed out till next spring if we have to wait that long for the ver pool to be able to be checked to see if it's and I think I'm going to have to defer that to them if if um Miss s isn't necessarily wrong um but we we already have to come back out for what uh theing anyway so we'll be here we can get up here soon so we have a motion in a second did you want to incorporate in your motion a sequence of events uh as Brandon indicated and they're going to look at that Vernal pool in the next few weeks and then get back to us and we have some sort of direction that sounds great i' like I I don't mind amending the a motion to include the vernum pool and for me personally looking at the picture with the amount of rain that we've had and we didn't have much warm weather until recently that it more so a large puddle I don't think it's going to come back as a Vernon pool personally Sev um there were also other things that Melanie had mentioned that I think we should address also thank you Kathy I feel like should make a new motion um because I think the motion is different I think the motion is that we ask um to Brendan to to give us a sequence of events okay so hold on we got a motion in a second we're in discussion if you want to withdraw your motion and you want her to make the motion because we got to vote on that motion so either that's a yes or a no then you can make a subsequent motion if you want but unless she withdraws her motion to include all the language um I'm just going to procedure so just withdraw to get all these other things done first I don't mind withdrawing mine but if it's possibly rewarded to include more I'm more than likely to vote no you want you want to make you want to make a motion on that is Kimberly withdrawing her motion and I'm just saying it depending on how much we add I may vote no I'm happy to amend my motion on the floor now to include eco systems going out and making a decision on whether or not it's a Vernon pool or not but I don't think at this point in time that we need the whole sequence events because it's already statute law and being worked on and it's so confusing with everything going on I don't follow the second F the sequence events we're going to need no matter how we proceed right my understanding of the secrets events is why make the applicant go through this exercise of going to the zoning board um when we have all these other unanswered questions that may affect the fate of this permit before you know ahead ahead of that exactly that's right so it includes getting more information on the intimate stream the the the flip plane um what else Alternatives analysis the Alternatives analysis correct the riverfront area analysis uh intermittent stream the river analysis is not for this one that is for the subdivision so miss King so it kind of makes sense that that if he they check the veral pool then and they come up with a sequence of events um I think that's going to assist do in and I think that'll answer most of your questions because a sequence of events is going to I see four things in the sequence Vernal pool flood plane intimate stream Alternatives analysis those are all those are four things that should be done first cuz the commission may not be happy with one of those four regardless and for allive which was originally one te right I would because there's so much overlap in all the folders and I understand that we're discussing it individually but if we're going to have them do it why wouldn't and it seems like the same issues keep reoccurring as we go to each new hearing why wouldn't the board issue it as a whole and ask for these things as a whole of the property in the project rather than just this one notti is is that going to be part of this or you just going to do the alternative analysis on this portion this particular the alternative analysis is for the Welling Crossing which only applies to last 2 and 14 okay the sequence of event of events though could be done on the entire High projects I see that would be the recommendation I correct and as far as the Alternatives analysis for the a hill line subdivision you can just put n a okay I see a point but I think they got to do um the sequence events along would determine whether the it is a veral pool because we're back to square one if it's a certified ver no I 100% understand that but I'd like to see the sequent of events be done for the whole entire property and not just one parcel at a time like we're discussing certain things and it only relates to 4T and 2T but we're going to come back at the next meeting and we're going to discover that they need to go and spend the same cost when they just could have done it once as the overall project because the same issues keep reoccurring the same suggestions keep coming up in each parcel that we're going over separately cuz we're looking at it as a roadway 2 2T 4T and we haven't got into 3T and the others yet but in all the reports it is the exact same concerns it's the same questions it is the same recommendations so wouldn't we as a board vote that we want this information for every possible in the entire project I agree but I think we have to do it with every possible cuz we're only working on one passle at a time so so I I agree so I think in your motion we'll do that on this particular lot and then on the next particular Lots we'll do the same thing can we reopen the hearing we just had prior because we didn't ask for it to be done on that particular laot in the roadway and it was suggested in that I I don't know that the roadway is has a big enough impact does it to it it can be implied this point it can be yeah like just Mr Webby do the same thing for Hill the lane because they Clos it already for the night and I okay you open it up next time you can open it up again well if you if you're going to agree to do it then then that's fine see but we need to reopen it to have the vote just for that parcel because we're doing it parcel by parcel chair just all right so let's finish that and if you want we'll go back to to that one okay so just to be clear we have a motion in a second do you want to go through that motion again tell us yeah let make it clear for the public and let's reord it correctly so I'll withdraw my motion so it can be rewarded correctly to okay you withdraw me a second okay so you want to make that motion make sure you're in the mic so that whoever is recording this is going to be able to get it I'll take some notes I make a motion that we go ahead with the suggestions of ecosystems that we requ require the flood plans vernum pool alternative analysis and there was one other intermittent stream and the intermittent stream with the riverfront okay let me just make a suggestion is that the correct motion just for some clarity just to make sure I believe it is Mr chairman okay and we're going to make that okay before we move forward yeah so it's require flood plane alternative access alternative uh analysis analysis immediate immediate stream and the riverfront intermittent stream the flood plane and I'm not sure about the riverfront or was that that's a different person that's a different one okay so we have a motion uh do I have a second um second okay we're going to go to go to a vote um all in favor I I I I okay so that's 4 zero vote um based on that we we will continue this hearing until what's the time certain you want to go 7:23 well I I don't care 7:00 7:23 whatever it is oh oh I see you're talking about July 23 yes yes 7 723 um I'm going to and this is I got it right we're on 2T um I'm going to look for a motion to reopen um I'm sorry the Broadway no we're going to we just continued I took a vote oh I'm sorry did I we did not take a vote to continue to vote okay so let's I'm looking for a motion to continue um map 120 lot 2T hearing until July 23rd I make a motion that we continue for the Lan lot 2T till July 23rd second I'll second all in favor I I 4 Z and I'm looking for motion to reopen the hild theane roadway I'll make a motion to open 8 hild theane roadway okay second second all in favor I I okay that hearing is opened and we're going to allow a motion it's going to be the same motion but you can read that you're going to I make a motion to require that the alternative Atlanta alternative analysis Vernal poool River the flood plane the intermediate stream and the River Front be done I'm looking for a second uh second second okay I'm going to go to vote and there's no discussion uh we'll go to vote I okay I I okay so four zero um now I'm going to be looking for a motion to continue the E Hilder lane roadway until 7:23 I make a motion that we continue hold the lane roadway till July 23rd second I second okay in favor I I am 4 Z unanimous Mr wey we are now on plot 4T and this shows an noi hearing just going to have to bear with me have the prop was this hearing opened and contined Joe yes it was okay so we're going to go a continuation from one of we met last I guess um on map 120 lot 14 The Joe Webby web engineering and this is 4T which is uh to the west of 2T and I would suggest that whatever you allowed us or would like us to do on 2T you just put it right over on this one and it's going to be the same concerns okay um Mr Defan I'm going to ask you to just give us some comments on your review thank you Mr chairman uh Margaret and I this is a team effort um and and our our comments are very similar not identical to to to is there anything different miget that we had for this one not really the same if you don't mind just what what are they so that we make our motions know I think that the the sequence applies here all right same way you just did for 2T because uh this this this map shows it even a little bit better we go this this is what I think is the intimate stream right here this narrow blue line so you know the further you can shift The Crossing if possible over here you go from from this width down to thatth yeah somewhere much much more narrow and there's less BBW it's more of a stream than it is a uh swamp swamp land right which also means you you have to meet the uh most you know the stream study still needs to be done but if it's determined to be a stream then the crossing will have to meet the massach stram Crossing standards that's a comment that you made that we understand that Crossing is going to have to meet all the standards anyways correct yeah you can't just uh put in a CR a pipe and and throw down some dirt anymore it's not as that simple anymore so that applies uh any comments from the board on this one as of yet um no I think we just got to do the same I would suggest we do the same thing as far as um sequence of events okay that we do with TT any questions Mr K at this point I have an overall question that I thought of um and call me crazy fat asking such a question if if so would be but are there IPM requirements you could just want you be specific integrated P management or anything such requirements with all species pests you said right yeah for around him any form of restrictions or any recommendations for such things no so um this is the lot in which the replication area is going to be in okay so and I'm getting to your point um the performance standard for the success of wetland replication area is that after two full growing Seasons it must be uh occupied by at least 75% indigenous Wetland species so natives right so that means that a you have to have at least 75% survival all right but there's another way to look at it the other way to look at it is you can not have more than 25% invasive plants in it so invasive plant um eradication and suppression is part of any standard Wetland replication area plan and I I I haven't seen a wetland replication area plan for this lot um and I and I have comments uh in in the report on this about wanting to see a planting plan wanting to see cross-sectional detail of the weap replication area um but you know what the construction sequence is going to be I have the same comments in here about um um doing uh you know regular inspections during the process bottom inspection plant inspection soil inspection final inspection etc etc so uh IPM does play a role in the we and replication area construction okay yeah any other questions from the board anybody in the audience I would just like to um comment that the comments from the abuts apply to all of these these projects that they are not just for the the road or 2T they have been sent to us for all of the the projects that's correct that is correct yeah so I just want to make sure that that's clear okay I would be looking for this one's going to have to be continued so I'd be looking for a motion to continue unless there's any anything else yeah I believe we need to do the sequence sequence of events first I think that was part of the no this is a this is a brand new parel so we have to make the motion again so I'm going to you to make that motion so I make a motion for the sequest of events recommended by ecosystems for the intermitted stream for Hilder Lane lot it's 40 for the anim the alternative analyst and the flood planes and the riverfront and am I missing anything in this the potential Vernal pool poal and the potential vernum pool do I have a second second okay we'll go to a vote the vote all in favor okay that's a 4 z um and I'm going to be looking for a motion to continue this one we're going to go to 723 again okay looking for motion to continue till 723 I make a motion to be continue the lane lock number 14 till July 23rd I'll second okay we have a motion in a second all in favor I 4 Z okay we are down to Haywood street map 121 lot 1D there's some confusion the F if you did you do a review on yes you did no you did a review on 361 that there was a question on 105 pill road which road well Haywood Street and pill Road y so we have those all covered I I did not I did not have time to provide you a report for Palmer Mill Road but I do have veral report okay we're what we're going to do Mr we're going to do Haywood Street first sure so if somebody wants to hit the button um Haywood is a new hearing so I'll have Miss King read that into the record if anybody wants to take a break just let me can I use the restom real quick sure goad you like to we take a five minute break I could use one myself okay go ahead yeah take a minute look at all that hangum stuff a lot it was interesting oh good I do have a friend that practices lot that I was going to reach out to him J your friend see what he thought bathroom to CL [Music] be this Al then I have one very onsite what time it should have been over an hour ago so I don't know I don't know how late they will make us go I think we have to finish everything on the agenda wish I had better news C and then we got which which property are you [Music] with Hayward Hayward is it Hayward wait a minute I don't I don't see you on the agenda [Music] um I don't think you're on the agenda say it again what what's the property 122 mon ponset Street I don't see them on here no 122 what was happening then somebody do you have the paper with you uh ready um yeah we're going to reconvene but we have nothing on the agenda for 122 and I'm I'm not aware of anything let me just check anything happening at 122 122 Ison oh no is it are they at the wrong town I'm looking much Clinton there there's nothing on the agenda no for 122 I I wonder if you went to the wrong meeting Selman had a meeting I don't know what their agenda was could it been an entertainment permit outdoor entertainment I know there's some some of that stuff down there there wasenda did I put in last I thought you were here for one of these where do I find it uh that's office hours uh go back to home go back to the C there's a me see maybe I'll no I'm at the homepage okay different home boards and try that home boards and committees boards and committees okay I think you got home ohe you can get it from there home so this is home there you go so last year they got a permit for an outdoor entertainment license at the SL that be on the same thing yeah I know that they've had Town calendar this is Municipal boarding committee meeting no okay go back well I don't think I can get there until I go to this oh that's school okay yeah I know they had they're always doing something down there so you you in the wrong office I'm sorry oh and I thought you I didn't think they asked I thought you were in on one of these hearings this so ladies and Gentlemen let's we're gonna go yeah thank you sorry for the confusion sorry about that just King back in session um is he he know back session just let him know we're back in session we back session this is a new hearing okay okay Hayward street map 121 lot 1D notice is hereby given of public hearing conducted by the Halifax cons Conservation Commission under the provisions of mgl chapter 131 section 40 and chapter 164 of the Hal town of Halifax on Tuesday June 11th 2024 so that should say June 25th 2024 7:20 p.m. at the Halifax town hall to consider the notice of intent filed on April 1st 2024 by web Webby engineering of Clinton Mass on behalf of the applicant Paul P of Kingston math to construct a single family dwelling in with associate Associated site grading utility septic system and driveway within 100 ft of bordering vegetated Wetlands at the pro at the property located on Haywood Street shown on a map 121 lot 1D copies of the filing are available at the Conservation Commission office at the Halifax Town Hall per request via email pegy Selter Halifax DM mask.org or by calling 781 293 6768 thank you I'll be looking for a motion to open the hearing I'll make a motion to open the hearing okay second okay all in favor I Mr Webby Joe Webby weby engineering and I'm here on behalf of Paul hero and he would like to purchase the lot called 1211 d uh there's a watering vegetated Wetland that was delineated by Brad Holmes we also have a 50t uh no disturb Zone and we have about 100 ft from the BBW what he would like to build is single family dwelling with a garage uh that will be approximately 64 ft from from the BBW this will be a walk out in the back so this will be right built right on the ground uh we are filling in the front yard uh and putting our septic system in this area and the driveway into the garage okay um board members have any question Mr Webby or we want to go directly to the review We Want You can reserve ask me have any questions um we're going to reserve to ask questions but Mr Webby did just hand me the division of fishery and wildli okay letter um Mr fanf did that review come back it did that one came back zero Haywood zero yeah yeah the um excuse me Mr chair um Peggy did leave a note that it we didn't receive the peer review for this project so I don't know if it was emailed in after hours or such but we would need the office to get a copy of the P review you you don't have a copy of the the this one no that's what the note says Okay I I got it so yeah there's just a note on it that there's that it's not received here I believe she's the one who sent it to me so hang on one second and she would have sent it to me yeah I send all our resp um Let me let me just take a minute before you start um the comments were dated June 24th 2024 didn't receive uh the comments were that the show the proposed tree line on the plan especially the 100 foot buffer zone uh have the design engineer consider 3 to 4 foot stone wall landscape walls to minimize fill in this area three design engineer may also want to consider a swir in the front of the property and number four has NH provided comments for the site the answer number four yes we just got it I'm sure they'll be submitted to the office okay uh Margaret bacon I'm a professional engineer and uh previous my previous profession I've designed hundreds of these and I'm sure you have too so when I look at a site like this I just look I look at all the fill all the fill obviously because you have a high ground water there the septic system is going to be up um and so I can I can understand a lot of the grading on that side but I see that they the driveway is also going to be up uh so he wants a uh an attached garage correct and so you know you know what that means there's 6 fet of fill right here and then you know been chasing that fill all the way around the house and so you know here's the 100 foot buffer zone so I see all the you know we got six ft of fill Z to six fet of fill over here we have six fet of fill in the front and then you know I my concern is even though this is outside the buffer zone you know we don't want the water running down on to Hayward scen know so you you you want to get creative and create some type of little Swale or pitch the water so it's not dump it out on the Hayward street and then the only reason I I mentioned the walls obviously uh that would save quite a bit of fill you know along the sides here you know that that's a lot of lot of dirt and that's a lot of money and uh but if that's the kind of house he wants you know he's going to be paying for a lot of dirt and that's what it comes down to but as far as the uh the weaps go then you know you're going to have a lot of exposed soil here and you just want to make sure that we're not getting any stimation off site so those are the biggies uh for me and I noticed that this whole area is it's an old frag Mighty or an active frag Mighty stand say frag mighty well not fragm are not not I do have a picture of that in the uh um our review but I didn't see you know how many trees are are coming down so it' be nice to see the tree line um to make that determination and I did see the house Stakes out there and they are right in the middle of that not we patch so so did there used to be an old house here at one time years ago yes there used to be an ancient house I think it was four would of that okay yeah it was a big F when I was a kid when Al was a kid so other than that I mean I think those are really only only the comments that jumped out of me yeah I I I do agree that uh we should have a little sale right in this area and smoke the driveway to that side I that that's easy um I think I can convince uh some r walls just some slant walls on these to Wing walls right um just it's so close to the 50 Foot no touch what is it on the other side of that 50 foot are there a lot of trees back there this pretty well densely wooded right in there and only reason I ask is a lot of has been things brought before us recently where properties have been built and then there are trees that are inside the 50 that then become a problem for the homeowners where they're afraid those trees are going to fall on their new house so I just didn't know if that was is that I know you can't foresee the future but is that something that could be a potential problem yeah this is kind of in a second growth maybe even a third growth area uh there you go the the big tree line is is back there thank you I don't know any other questions I have questions so I believe I read this peer review um there were so many but this is the one where all of that area where they want to build the garage has been previously Disturbed and is now overrun with invasive species is that correct so that's where they want to build the garage correct okay thank you yeah I I walked out there I'm sure you been it too going through the not I have question for the board so um could we approve with an order of conditions that they remove the invasive species because you could an invasion yes be because normally we don't Grant approval for something like this within the the 100 foot where it's a garage but because it's already Disturbed that I would feel differently about it because it's already Disturbed and invasive species so on the picture the invasive species are in this area this is the 50 Foot no touge yeah I think it's probably really probably like that so so that would be so that's going to be the whole construction area is it a Japanese not weed you said and was it Bittersweet as well oh there's Bitter Sweet out there correct but this area here is all that not weed and and you can see the house stes in there right in the middle of all the knotweed so the knotweed would be removed during the construction yeah I think so yeah that whole that all that's going to be to so that would just be automatic that's what you're saying automatic if it's it's all because you're limited work if is going to be this line right there correct okay so we not we don't want to disturb too much but that that's that's your limited work line so this is the limited work and then it comes down this I I think we will extend it here a little bit to make a little s okay this this line right there is that the line to work yes it is the S was recommended in the report yes yeah we have no problem with that and I had no problem with putting a couple of wing and I have a question in the report it also asks if National Heritage and um fishing game well now fishing Wildlife sorry um had been out and made a determination Mr Webby just gave me that determination so that has been completed oh question so this one says that they that they feel that there'll be no negative impacts that it will not adversely affect the actual resource area but however it is limiting they have stated that this is only for I got to go back again it only addresses the matter of real wildlife habitat and does not pertain to other wildlife habitats issues that may be permanent to the proposed project so the project may have to go back in front of National Heritage again no with that okay no they they uh the last paragraph on page one it reads that the the project is currently proposed will not result in a prohibitive take of State listed rare species so unless the commission can show a a a clear showing um to the contrary then you may rely on natural heritage's determination that it will not impact gr Wildlife um but uh Kim brings up a very good point is that this letter only addresses rare species there are other Wildlife species that are not considered rare that the commission has per view over so my question would be when you were out at the site and did you payview study did you see any species that may not be on the endangered species list but are a species of concern I'm going to defer to Mar maret this um did I see any species out there when I did the the review that were and species of concern not listed and danged but are around this I didn't physically see any any signs or I didn't hear anything in the in the the Wetland sometimes we'll take note you know if we hear peepers or bullfrogs or things like that or if we notice other type of wildlife we'll not it put it in our notes but we didn't nothing on that day when we out there for example we're doing a inad would do in a in a nearby town and we noticed uh during our our time out in the woods we saw a bobcat and a box turtle in the in the area is not listed for rare Wildlife so we we made those observations and brought them to the conservation Mission so yeah that that's something that we we do and but in this case no nothing special and no Wildlife that might have been rare species are concerned any such thing the only thing I saw out there there's some deer tracks know along wet thank you any other questions from the board uh two things one if um before construction begins and the erion controls are up if someone can come out look to look for just just to make sure everything ready to go just the check your yeah usually that's part of the order conditions okay yeah I thought you meant you wanted to check real species prior oh God okay okay and then the other thing was um do we want to put any posts up at the 50 absolutely I think we can include that in the order conditions um we have some pictures of some post that we would like to use No No Limit Beyond this point yeah I I think probably we really only need to go something like this we not we have no need to get over here no I would I would think wood can decide that probably you at least maybe 100 ft how many feet what's your scale is that a 20 scale 30 scale that's 20 scale that's a 20 scale so so so the post if you went half a dozen post would probably bring you I would think you only need to go there yeah so so so what do you like maybe 25 ft or 50 ft 30 ft probably that small area probably be 50 ft in the other conditions uh 50 is okay uh post now before we get into this anymore let me just check if there any AB Butters or anybody in the audience has any questions or concerns on Haywood Street I'm just afraid of the this don't you you come up getting your steps in tonight Bradford um I'm just afraid of the erosion because Hayward street is so bad um so you're saying the swell is going to help that situation yes is that what that is okay I didn't really know what a SP was Swale s okay it is swell but it is side bch all right that will contain it from going as much as possible say I'm sure it's all good sand there's a high water table but it's all good sand right there right thank you and Mr chair that would be part of the order of conditions that they meet the requirements or the recommendations rather of ecosystems how do how do we make sure if we were to approve it that I I think in this particular case we can use a standard order of conditions but I might suggest that ecosystems provide us with the the order conditions that shouldn't take very long we the power 53g is uh we have the ability to draft the order conditions for you if that's what you so correct um we do have there's there's two different ones floating around so just want to make sure you you get with Peggy I've seen two different ones so the special conditions yes the special conditions cuz those those we we'd issue a standard order conditions the special conditions would be the driveway sale and so forth and so on um I think if we don't have any comments what I would probably suggest question is that um we approved the project subject to getting a plan um that satisfies ecosystems as far as the Swale and W walls and then we put it on our next agenda for for signing will Kimberly will you be back you'll get be back in mid night so that's within 21 days yeah because you have 21 days and which the issues so I just want to make sure we could give you a waiver for that that's easy okay why you why don't you provide a waiver because we might have some issues with the office staff um so I'd be looking for a motion to approve the Project based on uh ecosystems reviewing uh a revised plan submitted by Webby engineering to to include swes and to include some Wing walls and to um make sure that the driveway does not drain onto Haywood Street and then issue a standard order conditions special conditions would be conservation post every 50 ft so somebody want to move that we'll make it so we're not continuing it we're making the motion we we're making the motion but we're not going to sign sign off until there's a revised plan I think everybody agrees we're okay so it's a making motion contingent on the revised plan correct okay and we're going to we're going to let ecosystems review that plan because they're not going to we're not going to have time that I I had just one one question and I don't know if there's an answer for it just to put it out there but I know in the past we haven't asked ecosystems to do our order of conditions um and I even with prior staffing issues so I'm just curious to know what the increased cost is going to be to the town and to the applicants um so we can properly budget going forward if these are going to be the types of things that we're going to require there there may be the the the beauty of uh this particular moment in time is that we're viewing eight row right so there's some scale right that could be made so I have a feeling that uh we're still going to be within budget but if youd have me to do you know one review solo and there's nothing else in the in the works then I might need to ask more but I I don't fore asking for more at tomorrow okay thank you yeah so someone going to move that motion I will move that motion with the condition if it makes it feel any better we we do we draft well over a 100 order conditions a year for various consolation commissions no I I believe you and you as the experts I like the idea I just wanted to be prepared of any increased cost because we have such a small budget in how that yeah the the budget would be the the applicant would have to pay for that and I did review one of his U proposals okay and especially on big pel on um in in Halifax the um we're not going to be able to draft that um and I think it's important we have a a good order of conditions yes all that everybody understands two or three years down the road and I don't think we have the expertise so I would rely on no I think it's fantastic and we've never done it before so I think it's fantastic that you guys do it too and it's an option for the top yes it is and it can all be covered by 53g through the applicant and not through the top um and one of the things that we do that I think adds value to the whole order conditions in the special order conditions we have something we like to add something called the findings of fat which uh explains how the sausage got made so to speak gives a little narrative background so that 5 10 15 years from now and all you see is an a condition special conditions with numbers and maybe a site planning like what the heck is going on you can look at the order conditions go are the special conditions the first two pages it tells you you know things like when the application was received when the public hearing was open when the public hearing was closed who were the applicable voting members what was the vote who was the applicant who was the representative and then a little background a little quick description of the property as it was at that time what is being proposed and what the conservation commission's you know how how it went and kind of like concerns that they might have had that got us to the point where we are and and I'm fine with that I I do spend a lot of time looking at minutes and um doing research and it's very difficult and uh trying to figure out what it what happened when you you're looking at the paperwork and um we had that experience on 112 River Street we finally Peggy and I went through all the files and the meeting meeting meeing minutes to determine what had happened I had been there and done that with Deb before pegy had taken over and it is a lot of work and I do i' like it and thank you guys for what you do you guys are you guys are vantastic thank you for call I have a motion I'm trying to see if I did I get a second second second all right um the motion's in the record so I don't know that I have to repeat it uh all in favor I'm I'm sorry I need to make sure I know what the motion is okay I believe the motion is going to be to to allow the project to move forward um there's going to be conservation post every 15 feet 15 15 every 50 ft on at do not disturb okay there's going to be a swell created I don't have the the plan in front of it swell created at at um Haywood Street and there' be no runoff from the driveway onto Hay Street and subject to the order of conditions being drafted by ecosystems is that part of the motion yes um I'd like yeah you can include that in the motion that's fine I don't have it was already included okay all right so I have a motion I have a second want to a vote Yes yes yes yes 40 uh look for motion to close the hearing I look yeah I look forward to closing the hearing no I make a motion to close the hearing for Haywood Street okay second okay all in favor I okay the hearing is closed okay how many more do we have two and then discussions okay um next is 105 P road which we can open that hearing but I have not seen the review and we were going franic at 5:00 did that review finally Comm in yeah I I I I have a verbal report for you okay is that going to be acceptable to the board verbal report I'm okay with a verbal report okay this is going to be a new hearing so I'll ask you to read that into the record 105 notice of public hearing notice is hereby given by a public hearing conducted by the Halifax Conservation Commission under the provisions of mgl chapter 131 section 40 in chapter 164 of the town of Halifax on Tuesday June 25th 2024 at 7 p.m at the Halifax town hall to consider a notice of attemp submitted by wede engineering of plinton Mass on behalf of for brosi Reality Group in Construction LLC of Halifax Mass to construct a single family dwelling with Associated grading utility septic system and driveway with 100t of the boarding vegetation Wetlands at 105 Palmer Mill Road Halifax Mas shown on accessors map 84 Lot 4 copies of the filing are available at the conservation commission's office at the Halifax Town Hall per request or via email if Peggy halifax. org or by calling 78159 3872 thank you um Mr Webby green cards I I believe I left them mo Ken yes I have the green cards okay um do I need I'm going to need a motion to open the hearing it's getting late I make a motion to open the hearing for 105 Palmer Mill Road second I'll second that all in favor 4 Z oops I'm sorry Mr Webby no Webby Webby engineering and and I'm here on behalf of Tim fosi uh he had purchased the de house which is an ancient house right about up in here and we were able to separate a couple of lots uh this would be the first one is also Retreat lot in this area but what he would like to do is uh construct a single family dwelling uh with aociated utilities driveways septic system uh right now we have a BBW that was delineated by Brad Holmes we have a 50t 100t u a majority of the work is going to be beyond the 100 ft but we are doing some work uh within the between 50 and 100 okay um I think at this point we're going to let fan of address his comments he's going to do verbal comment so we don't have them and then uh we'll open it up to the board thank you I'm I'm handling this um Brandon fan up ecosystem Solutions I have no issues with the no comments on the the well delineation by Brad Holmes I think the well delineation is accurate um I really have no issues with the site plan however I recommend that you all do a driveby because this lot has already cleared and I was able to walk right down to flag A3 which is right here and the uh basically uh the edge of clearing is about 25 ft away from from flag A3 which violates your 50 foot no touch Zone and I'm not convinced that they didn't uh go into the Welling where Flags A1 and A2 are because they jet out um towards pal m road and if you go to the site you're going to see that the edge of the clearing is parallel the pill road so it goes something like like this oh that didn't help so it goes like this so I I suspect that Flags A1 and A2 were obliterated in the clearing so we we have we have other issues like if if hadn't done that I think that this could have got approved tonight but the land was cleared it was stumped um smoothed out um the house stake though so we know where that is but I think that the the clearing um is much closer than the 50ft zone and possibly within the dvw in areas of A1 and A2 um the clearing continues uh let me get on the side the CLE continues around in this direction and then all this these two but behind the ancient house and in the the middle lot this is all cleared as well so I'm you know I'm walking back here checking out the Wetland flags and I come out into the clearing which is you know somewhere around here and I saw some more Wetland Flags by Brad Holmes ceries flags that were right at the edge of the clearing so I think that you have bigger issues than unfortunately than just issuing order conditions I have noticed that hold on just just a question okay um I did do a site visit so I'm familiar with what he's saying so I have done a drive by it noticed that it was also cleared but didn't know where it stood within town hall and was waiting for meeting so it's just been Justified to me okay I'm going to ask um for his some suggestions I I was on the site I did um no no I don't think that's going to be appropriate the um I did a site visit I did see some of the flags I didn't go into which one you know I think probably what I saw was might have been A3 or something yeah yeah some over there okay um I'm just going to ask you for your suggestions at this point um do we require um some sort of um replication prior to issuing any orders is U you've done this more than we have so yeah so my my recommendation is to go out do a little bit more survey work because we're going to need to know what the current um um tree line is so we know what the current limit of disturbances so you can quantify impacts and then come up with a restoration plan for work in those areas the commission would have never approved of anyway I'm presuming the area within 50 ft right so what usually happens in this these cases is the order of conditions is held up until the the restoration work is complete and and then the restoration work can be um um there's usually a two-year monitoring period which can be rolled into special order conditions uh I don't think it's really necessary to do it in enforcement order um as much as is you just hold up their ability to close out the own conditions that's usually painful enough to get people to uh comply so Mr chair if I may unfortunately in the town of Halifax since I have been a member this is an ongoing issue everybody does what they want no regardless of what Conservation Commission says and I'm sure it's because of our staffing issues and the commission's inability to have consistency over some time which is slowly changing but what can be a a decent consequence other than just the restoration work which would just have to be done anyways because this just isn't acceptable what you have the ability do do you has the town accepted section 21d uh ticketing is that You by law I believe it is it is you could always pick it and this is a very uh finable offense at $300 a day starting tonight um but I'm I'm very familiar with the the ticking process in fact I teach classes on it um but you need a you need a a ticketing book which I don't even know if you have we do we I believe we I'm very familiar with it we do because I had to do it for 31 want ocean app okay so you have to fill out the ticket um I'm going to presume you you find up to $300 a day and you can make it uh a date certain like you could start tonight and you can say the find's going to go through until the point where we we uh accept a restoration plan for the area right so you talking I got to usually these things go pretty quick once you start titing so you could probably finish your ticketing by July 9th probably so that's an option but the thing is with ticketing is that um there usually uh a white copy on top and there three carbon copies underneath it and each one of those carbon copies has to go somewhere one of them goes to the Conservation Commission one of them goes to the town administrator's office one of them goes to the the Violator uh themselves and one goes to your District Court yes so that means that at least once every 15 days the tickets have to be delivered by certified mail return receipt or hand delivered to the Violator and to the court and I am not familiar with your District Court here it's in Plymouth it's on O Street all right so some someone would have to take charge of that every other week I work in that area so I could drop off to the courthouse every 13 to 15 days that I can handle I that if if you really want to lay down the law and drop the hammer and all that good stuff that that's a way to do it get people to know and understand the commission means business and it's not not only this when this has come up in the past we have ticketed so we would be staying consistent with what we do as a board which is wholeheartedly important okay so that's your call I'm going to step over there thank you do M $300 a day is kind of Ste not that I'm against it but I can we I can we reduce it and vote no okay it has to be $300 a day okay yeah anybody in the audience make any comments um okay what's your feeling um I'm going to tell you that I'm not a 21d fan I was on the byw committee when we adopted it and I thought it was very very good way to prod progress with zoning violations and stuff like this the enforcement part of 21d is horrendous I mean to when those hearings are scheduled and agree or disagree that those hearings can be held with one hearing for a day so if you have 10 days worth the tickets $3,000 you can require a hearing on each one of those particular things yes you may and I and I've gone to them yeah I've represented towns in front of a clerk magistrate too yeah so I've done that so um you know alternative is to to require the survey like I was just saying you know survey the current Woodline with the current limited disturbances so you can quantify the the size and the locations of the area that need to be restored come up with the restoration plan that will be put onto this plan right here and and uh um and then and then you don't issue the order of conditions until the work is complete I foresee the them starting the work without a consequence like no I I think happens all the time in this I I think that probably the commission should consider tonight and we can issue an enforcement order that no activity be be done within the 100 foot um and then ratify that at the next meeting and that's going to give them the opportunity to come in with some sort of a a plan with uh some sort of replication um that's fine sorry can we delay the beginning of the ticketing process and give them time to do that so that we don't have to go through all the the process can we have the date that it begins be 2 weeks out or 3 weeks out um to give them time no I I think you you have to witness that violation per day someone has to go down there every single day to witness that violation we just went through that with with another zoning violation where the the the the officer every Monday morning wrote seven tickets so someone needs to go out there every day and verify that the violation still exists my thoughts is if we issued an order that there' be no activity within the 100 foot then he can't do anything within 100 foot until we get up here correct we we have jurisdiction yes within 100 foot you have controlling authorities so if we issue an order that no activity be done within 100 foot then somebody going to come in with a plan within the next couple of weeks a replication plan I would think that we could either approve amend heavy review and then when once that's done we potentially could request a bond um and let whatever activity needs to to go forward Bond you have the ability to to require Bond No I we do not on conservation I I don't know I I I'm got to I've going to disagree because I've I've been in situations not in Halifax where we had the bond you know for grass and stuff like that on the real estate closing so that's an option um think we have to to to require a bond and I think that's going to to uh produce some results with a performance yeah with a it's not really a it's it's more of a guarantee yes it's a Guarantee Bond and I think that would um frud compliance better than a 21d ticket that someone's needed surr today um and that's my opinion so I think the the board should look at whether or not do we do we want to but the other thing too is this is just one parel there's going to be a couple other properties coming up over here so do we want to address that now too if they've already started you know down vegetation on other they have done extensive clearing and I found some ECR atomes Flags right at the edge of the clearing that says it's C you know five so maybe we want to include those other passel and um I would do it separate those yeah it would it would be separate because this particular APLE we are now have a plan in front of us M if there was something else in adjacent puzle and we we have to clearly identify this is the APLE that the the activity is on and that's got to be clearly identified through 21d and then if there's another pule then we'd have to identify that separately separately but I think if there's a minimal amount of activity and nothing proposed then if there's a separate pule that has activity then we should issue an enforcement order which won't be lifted until such time as they file with the commission um just bear in mind that that you know we can issue an enforcement order tomorrow it has to be ratified at the meeting so if that's the course of action the board wants to take um we can we can do both issuing an order that no activity be done within the 100 that a plan come in uh within a few weeks a restoration plan that's going to be reviewed by ecosystems and then we can continue on with this hearing um and if the commission so wishes I can go out there in the next few days and look at the adjacent possible and if there is activity there then we issue an enforcement order on both I I have a question with the enforcement order we'd have to go out daily to make sure they're not working so not on non enforcement all on 21d you have to go out no I understand that but how are we going to know if they're not doing anything if we're not going out daily to check the enforcement orders actually being ahead to I mean you could you could volunteer I mean it's not a it's you know you have to go find the site so um you know we have to rely on compliance because if he wants to get a bill p he wants to do that house then he needs to comply well if he was complying this wouldn't have happen and ecosystems wouldn't have figured it out and found it so he's not in compliance I was out there u a week or 10 days ago and I looked at it and the owner was there and I said you you know you're in the buffone um so so I think we got a couple of options uh do you think the enforcement order at this point is going to be the most productive nothing wrong with that soti enforcement order um in the boxes to check are ceas and desist all activity um and the second is um there's already a notice intent in so you don't have to worry about that one and then you say a restoration plan is required by a date certain what date would you like to see the restoration plan probably July 9 at no later than July 9 no later than July 9 and at which point um if you don't get it by then uh what's your consequence I think that's when yeah that's what I was saying suggesting that if you don't do it by a certain date then it starts then we can we can issue citation right I just need to clarify when it comes to the enforcement Sy I don't know that who's got the authority other than the agent I will say you will have have a a plan of what what he disced before July 9th so let's let's cross that fridge so there is to me a question as to who has the authority as the board the commission we have the authority to issue the enforcement order okay yes I'm not clear that the chair is allowed to issue 21d tickets anyone on the board is and I only know that from 31 Ocean Al for a signature and so our professionals that Shing the head yes okay so you see but however in the end ticketing is usually done under enforcement order and enforcement orders have to be ratified by a majority of the board so one person on the board or the agent May uh sign the Osment order just one signature uh and then it can go into effect but at the at the next available meeting has to be ratified correct but it it it appears to me that he wants to move forward with we're going to get and compliance so you know I think a little premature on the 21 I just i' I'd also like to see the survey that was recommended on July 9th to as part of that enforcement order I'd like the SE the Seas and theist I'd like the survey and I'd like like the replica and restoration play ahead I also I think that Flags A1 and A2 were were cut down so I would like to see uh those reestablished in the field we can put them back by survey yeah thank you okay is the Mr we do you think this is going to be any problem with what do you want a tree line on there you want the flags red delineated you want A1 A2 A3 yeah exactly so I need the Disturbed area outline with with the current Tree Line reestablish lost I'll just say re reestablish lost flags and uh restoration uh planting plan which is going to be expensive if you go by the the DP recommended spacing trees uh are um go about 8 to 10 feet on Center yeah and shrubs are like 5 to 8 ft on Center they disturb quite a bit of room and and and the trees if you if you get a 4T tree that's a $250 tree yeah you know so this is going to be a very unfortunately very expensive Endeavor for the applicant whether you find them or not and and if you would like help writing the enforcement order you do that too I I do everything that is fantastic right so that that may require some additional 53g funds um do we have to ask the applicant if we can increase their 53g funds or are we allowed just to do that you need to ask the applicant because they they have the ability to um they have the right to uh question or or refuse or you know question the expertise ET ET okay I think we can draft the enforcement order I think I think the rest the the restoration plan is going to have to be reviewed by that I can okay and then my last question is so if we have to go I don't I'm not against the bond idea but if they want to continue to be difficult because it's just my experience since sending the board the way it goes and there's never compliance um can we do the bond and the 21d can we require that like are we can we do that at the same time cuz I'd like to see that in the forcement letter on such and such day 21d is going to start but we're also going to be requiring you that Bond of guarantee that this is all done the order conditions is complete I mean the 21d may or may not go forward or may go forward for a short time and then resolve itself but I'd still want to see the bond in there as well I just want to give the applicant as much not notice as possible and be as upfront with them as possible that these are the actions the board may or may not potentially take with you just to clarify that I think I think it should be a step by step approach um I think we can issue the enforcement order tomorrow and ratify it um on the 9th on the 9th um and I see what compliance we get the bonding would only be on the restoration plan or the notice of intent um I don't think we need to to do anything special on a restoration plan we don't need an additional filing we could require in the order of conditions that that area that was Disturbed uh to be bonded and do some research on on the bonding part of it um and let's hope that we get some compliance without throwing a hammer down let's if we don't get compliance then we'll look at the 21d like I said my experience with 21ds I thought it was great until you get situations and I'm going to tell you that 21 Ocean Avenue was very similar where the town spent $3,000 for an attorney and I think he got fined 150 so that doesn't make any sense was there yeah that doesn't make any sense at all so um we we need to compliance and I agree every Town's faced with the same thing if they can get away with something and it's education people don't realize when they buy a piece of property that that little puddle might be more than just a little puddle so I think we need to do it step by step I think that Mr webby's going to share with the owner that um we serious and I and I I think I mean there's a difference between confusing a puddle and a Veron pool between knowing that you had to put a notice of intent in and clearing Acres upon Acres out well well it wasn't agary because he alluded that uh the tree guy went a little too far but you know that's not our issue so so right now um I think I'd be looking for a motion to continue this um I'm not looking for a motion on the enforcement order because that's premature we'll do that tomorrow um so what's the board vot to have the enforcement order done no we need you need to vote after after you can just you can just just the with sign and then the next meeting then then then you're so does anyone want to make a motion on this particular one I can I'll make a motion to continue 105 Palmer Mill Road to our July 9th meeting yeah second okay so we have a motion in a second and I'm I'm just going to have you a second if a discussion um the I'm just wondering if in the motion it should so that we can ensure some compliance with the uh alifax regulations do you mind just adding that to your motion sure I will amend my motion as stated okay now that's just to to ensure compliance with uh Halifax's regulation so we have a motion in a second uh to continue it till July 9 at that point uh the engineering company is going to provide a restoration plan um um and we'll take it from there uh if that motion's okay we seconded all in favor I I it's [Applause] unanimous we have one more we have one this one is is it's a new new hearing um there's some confusion on it's a d number se1 71 0583 there's a little confusion with the address so um why don't we read it into the record as um the 361 is stated on the um the noi Andor zero Plum strep notice of public hearing is hereby given of a public hearing conducted by the Halifax Conservation Commission under the provisions of mgl chapter 131 section 40 and chapter 164 of the town of Halifax on Tuesday June 25th 2024 at 700 p.m. at the Halifax town hall to consider a notice of intent submitted by Webby engineering of Plimpton Mass on behalf of Mr we of Abington Mass to construct a commercial building with Associated graening utilities septic system and driveway with within the 100t of the boarding vegetation vegetative Wetlands at 361 Plymouth Street and or zero Plymouth Street shown on Assessor's map 73 lot 7A copies of the filing are available at the conservation commission's office at the Halifax Town Hall per request bya email the Peggy shelter at alifax d.org or by calling 78159 3872 thank you looking for a motion to open the notice of intent for this location which is either Zero fouth Street or 361 I will open it for 361 Plymouth and or zero Plymouth Street as maap 73 78 okay do I have a second I'll second that all in favor I unanimous Mr Webby you want to clarify the address first well U Joe Webby Webby engineering with me is Anie we and an's purchased this property uh the the the neighbor right here is 3.95 we haven't officially been given a number by the would it be the fire department or whoever but assesses well are the assessors uh but we're for us we're calling a 361 so so in any case an owns this uh 40,000 s foot lot that um has been open and cleared of any trees for quite a while the St completely Disturbed uh we had Brad hols go out in look like in 22 and he delineated the wetlands that would would go around the Des piece which is here just as a little bit of a uh to orient where we are the car wash is right here so the carow wash is across the street and a little bit to the right and what what an would like to do is he would like to build a garage uh for his his uh his trucks his own truck his only trucks and there would be a one bedroomroom apartment upstairs for himself and uh with these Associated Paving septic system drainage basin um as you can see we we try to keep all our work beyond the 50 ft and uh the only thing kind of between the 50 and 100 is a little bit of the Basin and some of the paving and iy can give you a little bit more information if You' like like to know what he does there he's going to be doing we're we're going to we'll hold off on that just for a minute um we we read the reviews and Stan I'm going to have you just come up and address it it didn't seem to be if you don't mind Mr chairman Margaret bacon took the lead on this this fine okay thank you didn't seem to be very many sit down I need to sit down L down good evening Margaret bacon again professional engineer um yeah when we went out and did the the Wetland review uh we noticed right off the bat that you can tell that there was a lot of historic fill on this adjacent lot um and most of these flags right here were either gone or there were just stubs left or they they weren't legible they they were old so uh we really what you could see where some of the stubs were and right the end of the weap in the fill so you know you can tell that like I said historical this area had some fill and actually I've uh did some review on some of those historical Google Earth maps and you could see uh since 2015 up that there's a lot of fill been placed on this slot and on this lot um but back to the Wetland line so so this line here we really couldn't confirm this line here on this property it looked like somebody put some fresh Wetland flags up here in this area too you could tell this this Wetland area has been historically filled over the years I don't know you know how long ago well you can just just tell that you know that what whatever the extent of the Wetland limits were uh at one time is uh been reduced um so that was one of the issues and then the other issue um now is this going through S plan review with the planning board uh it we are in the middle of site plan review yes okay so they're doing their storm water review yes we will do the storm water review what conservation does storm water review and um it at both boards actually do it chair um planning has their role and then conservation has their role and that's the beauty of having Margaret because she's a professional engineer she this is where she does for her living I did okay now I'm reviewing but anyways um so yeah so it jumped out of me I so I you know I see there's a drainage report in here but I wasn't quite sure if we were supposed to be reviewing this or not I didn't see it in the scope of our services and um but I did I did do a preliminary review and a couple things jumped out at me and and one of the things that jumped out at me is I don't know if they did test pits out there were those we did I think where I don't know why we didn't put them on there but we have them on on the I think it's the fifth page we have we have a couple just got we just got to tell you where they are where they were yeah because I didn't yeah I didn't see anything in the report or anything so I I wasn't sure if that was done so now that I know that that's there um I can take a look at that and then uh just not to interrupt you but we we have a separate review for the storm water as far as the the Conservation Commission so we're not reviewing you're not going to be reviewing okay so that's why I didn't spend a whole lot of time that was just preliminary view um so and I'm not going to worry about the storm water but well we do worry about Stone water because the last thing you want to do is design something like this and then not have it work you know then it's a problem so um so I guess you know our our recommendations would be is to uh somebody needs to refresh those those flags there did you find that there was a problem with the flags well you can see where the the the tall slope is the tall of the FI you know so but but a lot of these flags weren't there sometimes you can just see a little stub it certainly looked older than two years um but yes Mr chairman we we are concerned that uh since 2015 when it's obvious on the Google Earth maps that Phil is being imported to these two sites that BBW may have been filled so we we do have a concern about that but we can't really go any further until we we can see the flags and find see in the field let me just add some personal knowledge because I I know that both Lots were filled um the lot that we are discussing now now uh was filled dramatically in the early '90s okay um I'm going to say at that point they probably put four or five ft to fill in then um and then subsequently I'm going to say in the last 3 or 4 years it's probably three or four years ago that they they did perk that because it was a question as to whether or not they would perk because obviously it's not going to perk in the fil I believe the commission on the lot adjacent to it and I don't know the number um allowed some fil on that particular lot um that I'm I'm sure of so there may be conditions I don't on the neas I don't know if there was an order conditions I don't know what happened but I I know that um that the the commission has allowed that allowed some fill in there uh okay you know the applicant can can provide something so what are you recommending uh refresh the Wetland on so we can we can check that out because that's job number one is is uh you know if you're going to be protecting wetlands and reviewing a site plan the first thing you have to know is where is the Wetland resource area and is the delineation correct and having that history um that sh was just talking about would be very important for our decision- making process because if there is an over bar conditions um that allows filling here then our concerns go away I'm sure you remember that Kathy that was probably 10 okay left to remember it I'm trying to remember it yeah what about stais and what was put on that if you if you look at the blue line there's a space the blue line and then the next is the uh old autopod store and then um what the street that goes up not l l Indian Path so in between the bvw there it goes back into Uplands the old autopot stores right at the corner which would be there good three or four acres yeah between the auto pass would be somewhere in here and then Indian Path is over here so I I know that there was an order I know that there was something issued on that to allow that and I know in the past in the early 90s that was filled um dramatically and there's no enforcement action no l conditions required that how I I don't know that this I don't think that this lot I mean I know the parties I don't know that in the early 90s I mean your regulations only go back to ' 89 so I don't even know how much of a commission you had back in the 90s but I didn't you know I remember him doing it um I don't know why they would have gotten permission with you know even if there was a commission or it might have been a small commission I don't remember that but so but I do know that that was filled because it was a concern that when when that was purchased on whether or not it was going to perk or were they going to attempt to try to perk it in the fill do the soil logs reflect the substantial amount of fill see ift yeah there at least 3 ft of fill in that area the this and one of the reasons back then is Halifax had a very strange regulation that you had to be 6 fo 6 above the water table was that prior to Title 5 there was an odd regulation that you needed to have 6' 2 or 6'6 or something 60 in 60 in 60 in the water table and that sense because you got 3T of fill and then the modeling which indicates the seasonal high water table starts at 46 and 48 in right so I remember I think did Kathy Dron perk that that is that the name of yeah she was out there yeah she was out there pregn I I do recall that so um and she was well aware of the fill it is substantiated in uh in some of the records so so your recommendation at this point is is to uh I have a question is this the property that abuts the endangered species that is out back near DP and some other areas there we have some older maps in the top Halifax but I want about 10 12 years ago I know they were updated they were updated in 2021 and so they've been update updated again but I know the town didn't get hard copies and other things and a lot when I go to redo and look they sto doing hard copy It's All Digital now yeah I used to we used to get these giant like atlases like this that's the yeah do you mind bringing that down the best of my recollection that the be on that isn't that 395 plou street right there yeah this is 395 that's the old red yeah and then and was that Stan's property there I can't read that where all the Chicken F yes stent used to be on the back okay that went to Indian pack okay and that's where the chicken houses were chicken houses CH yeah and then you have the BBW that comes off of Indian Path but I I think that comes from the pond in front of the fire station comes underneath the road to create that this Wetlands here and there's a pond across from the fire station I'm trying to think of which way the water flows there I believe it all flows in that direction to the West Auto Pond what what's that little pond called somebody the street from fire yeah somebody mentioned the name that I never heard the other day um so at this point we need to to to Red delineate the line and then revisit that that's going to make the make the difference and in that area too I'm almost positive and and I can triple check with the mcps that there is an underground stream that runs from where that little Pond is under in the'll see the outl outlet that goes under the dirt driveway and runs towards the back of the property but I don't know if it would affect how we may or may not vote on this project cuz I don't see it on the map are you thinking about the stream next to the fire station no the stream next to the fire station goes into the Little Pond and then if you're walking so if you're at the fire department and you're looking left and you're walking left towards the pond there is a dirt driveway that leads back to a house and there is a CT where it runs underneath that dirt driveway and when you walk sometimes it they may be all ditches but sometimes it's dry and sometimes there's a good amount of water in them but I'm almost pretty sure that it it's it's a stream I'm going to my my experience is because I was going to put water service in that particular house and we investigated by the fire station and we investigated that's street that that dirt path is actually it's either old plumouth Street or there's a name that goes from Indian Path out in front of the school in front of that gentleman's house when when route 106 was straightened out they put it near the fire station so I I recall in the research that there's drainage off an Indian Path that comes into that area and it's probably where that c was because we were trying to get water from Indian Path Town water um and we couldn't and there is the bvw on that side and I think it's more from the drainage soad so I I'm curious what it is that the trucks are for and what he does is it an appropriate time to ask that question um or should we no I think I think we've decided that we're going to get the line done but no absolutely all right yeah because um trucks you know depending on what type of truck and what will be done there could impact the wetlands so Hi H where um yeah so I just I run a transport business an individual transport business I just I move cars to Florida in the fall and bring them back in the spring and it's a on- man operation I'm just going to be parking a trailer and having my rig inside the garage pretty much how how many trucks do you have I have two you have two okay one I'm the only employee so it's diesel fuel or G diesel yeah the 18 LS um yeah it's pretty cut and dry it's not a high traffic situation or anything like a terminal or you know just my customers will bring the cars there and I load them up and leave and I'm gone for 10 days at a time so you you're not parking cars there you're taking them right to Florida they don't stay they may par a couple days possibly yeah so I collect them to get a full load okay how about how many cars make a full load six six okay okay thank you any other questions okay I do have one there's going not going to be any repairing or servicing of any of these imported cars no the cars are strictly getting transported and the service are are would be beyond the 100 foot buff hisone anyways correct okay um any kind of it's more cost efficient to sublet any repairs on the trucks or anything so I obviously they'd be in the garage most of the time so Mr I jurisdiction is going to be the drainage basin and the rear parking lot okay okay so I I think I'd be looking for a motion to continue I'm sorry I just just to follow up a little of you know mine um because I and this might you know answer some questions regarding the uh the fill um if you look at the uh the soil the soil maps for this area there's there's and these soil maps are actually fairly accurate uh there's a there's a line right here and on this side is called an Eldridge soil which has a a ground water elevation about 18 to 24 in and it's a it's a much denser soil it's not conducive to uh infiltration and then over here you have a marac soil okay but obviously the site has been Disturbed so so my question to you Mr Webby is um when you showed me those soil logs on the other sheet I actually they showed them right there okay and so those soil logs that are on the second sheet aren't for the septic system no they're for the for those I just want to see what these numbers are D what does it say D2 and D1 okay and so I I come up to this next page and I this is the um the septic sheet all right no this is this is your detail sheet and this is D1 and D two d1s but one is D2 okay and so I guess and so where the where are the SE the Sor logs for the septic um they're not on this page this is the construction details okay so I I don't I don't know if we've actually drawn a separate plan but it's going to be over in this area okay so um so there's a separate uh store water reviewer on this yes there is um would it be possible for us to get a copy of their comments when their review was done yes it would be the problem is is that the procedure is now is going to be is going to be filing the notice of intent and once that's completed then he'll file an app application for storm water so you won't have that information prior we're not doing it simultaneously because there's there's time restrictions on the storm water where there isn't on the notice of intent and we can't get everything all together that that quick so this do the storm water after this has been correct approved okay I don't know how that can work because of the storm water standards protection it doesn't work the problem is is we've got a bylaw that that's that gives us a certain time frame we've got you know you can you submit the application uh it's got a time frame to go up to certain committees and we got all the hearing so we are holding we are doing it step by step while violating the law I think is his point and the statutes that I don't I don't I don't think we're violating the law because if if any of our if if any of our storm water is in the wetlands protection act then obviously our review Engineers is going to pick all that up and we we have I mean I've got a know six or eight page it's probably 13 page report now where they've done reviews and storm water because that process was started both at the same time so if we got to meet any storm water standards through wet's protection we got to be in that jurisdiction and this one you're not um the discharge is okay that's what brings you into you know the Wetland protection act so and the only thing is with reviewing the storm water after the fact what happens if this has to be changed because uh we have a brand new regulation so we're going step by step so and I know there's going to be some bugs in it and if it has to be reviewed or it has to be changed and aled then it will be so after a notice of intent has been approved we could find out that there's a problem with the storm water and then but that's already been approved and there's no recourse then well you do subject two yeah you you storm water you're going to get a notice of intent on storm water so you're going to be covered okay excuse me you're going to have to do an order condition not an order it's 11:30 uh you have to do an order condition so we'll make sure that everything complies so you order of conditions on say this project here and you're going to approve this notice of intent before we do the storm water it would be subject to the storm water being yeah that very well could be part of the for the condition it would it would have to and I help draft the new storm water regulations and I don't remember and I don't have my H copy in front of me there being a timeline for it or that we should do it cuz it it they bring up great point it makes no sense and doing everything in with the conditions of just I think makes it harder on our profession I'll save you some I'll save you some time we we've had this discussion yeah we've had this discussion so yeah it it's in there uh is it 5c or 5B D okay yeah show it it shouldn't be in there there's there's so many overlapping you know it's like so we have to we got to rely on the planning board approving it because the planning board hasn't approved this am I correct so so we're going to go to the notice of intent if if there if there's something that doesn't comply with something that planning voard actually um issues then they might have to go back and reopen that notice of intent um we're just going by the procedures is that possible to reopen the notice of intent once it's already been approved the the applicant has to come back with an amendment yeah they yeah it's in it's in here it says may require an amended permit application which is an additional cost but I don't remember conservation voting or approving age like I'm going to go have to go back and read our meeting minutes now I mean I did work with some of that with Charlie and it's there so so in chapter I I Chapter I section two issue a permit with conditions okay it being 11:30 I'm going to be looking for a motion to make a decision on what we're going to do with this and it sounds like we're going to continue this I I'll make a motion to continue okay 361 Plymouth Street and or zero Plymouth Street with the conditions of storm water authority and storm water regulations no no that's that's not a proper motion get the Wetland Del we're going to get the wetlands red delineated remarked that's all we're going to do at this point yeah so so that we can do a proper review correct so the motion is let me withdraw that Mo motion because we were just talking about this my apologies guys put a motion in to have the wetlands red delineated red delineated to re refresh the Wetland boundaries correct excellent and then continue it until and are we going to July 23rd July 9th I I have to talk to Brad I don't know how quickly he can get out there so why don't you go to 20 723 to July 23rd okay I second okay all in favor I I that's unanimous okay thank you thank you okay thank you and Mr chairman yes we're going to be getting out now I want to you don't want to stay till tomorrow yeah might just be so I brought Margaret because I want to introduce you she's very individual and professional SCI I need to go back and and you know we quite a bit in front of you it's been a team effort because it's just been so much but um you know I do review work for other towns as well and July I have to be in lakev um so with your permission if uh Margaret could come so off absolutely thank you absolutely you and we appreciate your your assistance and your help tonight um I I thought this was going to be an easy I thought we were going to have a lot of continuances uh but I did okay thank you so much thank you both okay we're going to finish up the rest of this very quickly yes plan to I public comment before we um vote end the meeting that's fine let me let's just get our bills um there's we're not going to we can discuss we're going to have to discuss he's been waiting on 265 Monon Street um I'm probably a little more familiar so let me just take this one take over on this one we've gone to little project big project 265 is the big project correct and they put in an application for storm water review and I indicated and showed them the regulation that we were going to be doing the notice of intent and then we were going to do the storm water management afterwards um and I think Mr eldre just looking for tonight is is whether or not the this commission is satisfied with the comments made to date on 265 and and as we saw earlier 265 um there is work in the 50 to 100 uh we asked for a site visit on that particular lot there was some questions that I have not been addressed on the sedimentation Bays on the storm water uh some rip wrap areas um there was rip wrap areas of sedimentation Bays we are now going to change the um Wetlands replication area so and the other issue and I'm not sure 100% And in my conversations with the with fire chief he needed access around one of these buildings I know 266 there's an issue with the exit because that's only 16 ft wide and in my conversations with the chief I was under the impression that at 265 he needed some access to the rear of the building but but I could be wrong is that correct he does need it to the back of the building and it's existed since the beginning of our submission okay it's always been there and he's he's satisfied with ACC on Tu okay so all we're looking for tonight is I don't believe at this point this plan is a March 13th date um sorry I think again there's a lot of confusion here so you got a February date in the March so this this plan on 265 the big project so that one that one that was the more recently submitted uh plan so that was uh submitted the application was submitted on May 13th so that has not been out there you know it's been out there a little bit more than a month but it's the 266 one that was originally submitted way back in March a heing was opened it was continued and then it at the date was continued to it was kind of uh let's say truncated if you will okay um so that's the one that's been out there a while 266 the small one has no notice of intent associated with there's no we ones on the site so let let's stay with 265 and the question is going to be whether or not the commission is satisfied with the plans as to dat and it's going to be my recommendation commission that it's not um we need a now that they're going to change the replication area I think my theory has always been when we look at a plan and we approve a plan we're going to approve a plan based on the plan the plan date inclusive of any revisions so I think it would be uh very problematic if we considered the March 13th plan as the last and final plan when we know that the replication area is going to be done uh in a different area we don't know that the rip wrap is proposed and and the review are very very long it shows that the review in the reviews it shows that the changes have been made but I haven't seen a plan other than the May 13th or March 13th plan so if you made the changes in the rip wrap areas and the detention basins and you made the changes the changes were the amount of thickness of of LOM that were going in the basins I think some side slope uh applications of top soil those are all comments I have not seen a plan that reflected all of those yeah so so I you know backing up on this this is kind of a big picture of discussion so I I agree that those are all items that have yet to be completely addressed and yet to be incorporated into plans the the issue at hand in front of the commission is is the application complete not have we satisfied everything but we're at we're just looking to start this process and start notifying the letters and get the public process going I appreciate and actually enjoy um getting a lot of this stuff worked out in advance so to date it has been submitted uh it has been peer reviewed uh for storm water it has been distributed to the four boards or entities that are required and comments have been received or sufficient time has passed from all of those boards so we've gotten to the point where the application is in the the plans are in and all the comments have come come back so um my question is really kind of when does it end um in terms of the the application being Complete because it's unusual for all of the issues to be worked out before the application is even deemed complete and the process started so I understand your your you the bind that you are in with the time frames that are within the uh you know your regulations and I've offered to kind of alleviate that problem by saying well from the outset I will grant an extension on the time to perform so that there you can have a couple meetings you know U before you're required and again hopefully by now you see that we act in good faith and usually you're faced with the choice of well we can deny the permit or you can grant us a continuance to give more time to work things out okay and so um I'm you know this is a unique process and you guys are clearly kind of working through how you want to handle this um but uh again I I it's common practice for permitting to run in parallel rather than in series otherwise you would never get a single permit if every border commission was waiting on another border commission to complete their permit so and especially given that um storm water in particular already already gets reviewed in parallel with the planning board so it's kind of already in motion anyways you you have done your storm water with planning but not concom correct they did it with both okay the the peer review comments for 26 6 went to both and for 265 actually they went to conservation first for 265 cuz we submitted to you guys first figuring that that was going to be the longer Journey um but the same comments apply to planning and to the notice of intent and to the storm water EGS and we're going to accept them to answer your question so I appreciate you I appreciate being so responsible you communicated a lot but it's yeah my my opinion in reading the regulations is that we should have a completed application which should be inclusive of all reviews so my hope and I think the commission hopefully will agree that when you give us a plan that plan is going to be complete there's not going to be any changes other than some field Minor Adjustments that this Ford can sit and look at and say okay they've done all the due diligence okay they've met all the criteria that storm waterer management wanted they met all the criteria that that I review engineer on wetlands and I have a plan right now all I have is on May 13th plan and I've got minutes in conversations that and even with your review comments that say that we've made that adjustment we've changed for in one small thing and it's not a big deal you change your inspection ports from 4 in to 6 in that's fine but I think we should have it all on a plan so my goal is only to make sure that whatever plan you submit the last and final plan that we look at and that we're going to approve is going to have all the comments adjusted uh all the comments by a review engineer for conservation and review are going to be made the plan's going to be complete at that point we're going to hold a public hearing so the public can pick it apart but you will have everything you need now I'm not interested in planning because that's not part of what we have to do so you can work simultaneously with planning to get all that stuff done um I don't know if you need a special Premier to you zba or you planning uh we're just site plan approval okay so I mean you can go through all of that because I don't very much things are going to change my concern is that I've seen you got pages and pages of review stuff but I haven't seen a a plan that shows all of the the adjustments okay then that's I think that's all um we be looking for i' second that what the chair is saying like me personally I'm not going to vote unless everything's been adjusted on the plan and you've been in front of us I believe multiple times now and see the consistency where we ask everybody to change their plans and then can continue the hearings for them to come back so everything's accurate before we vote yeah for notice of intent not for storm water but this storm water is kind of special again just kind it's being mod I can assure you that very shortly all on notice of intents are going to be completely vetted before they're advertised so so I I as a as a proposal so focusing on 266 remember there's no notice of attent there's no 266 what small one the small small one yeah West Side of the Street next to the golf course so the single 30 unit building um um so uh we have a peerreview that says all for storm water that all the issues have been addressed I'm going to stop you there okay okay I highway highway has got a concern no I I understand I'm just saying okay so checking one box at a time okay so we have peer review for storm water saying that all the items have been addressed so Police Department no comment uh Board of Health they made a comment that says when Board of Health receives the proposed septic plan we'll ensure that it complies with ms4 um so Highway had a concern regarding uh water jump and catch basins basically so um in terms of how to address that so that comment is unique to the storm water permit it it doesn't appear in any other permits that we're doing so so in terms of how to address that there's no peer reviewer that's kind of should I mean what should I do should I go to the highway department and say because there's no he's not pointing out a defect in the plan he's just kind of making a comment well okay if if you look how do I how do I address that what's the process we're being confronted and Lady the left earlier I got two situations right now that caused flooding when I looked at your plan all right um and I don't know if it's up there you've got you got a driveway that goes up 5et in a short distance all right you need to make sure that you contain all the affluent that's coming off of that 5ft slam none of it's going on one Pon Street that's all you need to address now that means that you should put so so we have catch basic right at our property line right before M so I don't know uh uh again I I'm a former civil engineer I can come up with all types of Technical Solutions what I'm asking is who's going to approve my suggestion okay what you're going to do with the highway department comments I think this is on page five or something the highway department no this is the big one this 266 is the one yeah that's really my only question you don't have to pull it of tools in my toolit basically for for the highway department yeah you need to make sure that all the storm water that's coming off that site in that 5 foot slope okay is retained on site okay and if you look at this particular plan you're going to find that at least what I saw of the plan it it doesn't so you need you know maybe there's maybe there's something that we missed and I want so so the storm water we're reducing the amount of flow off the site onto the street and all our storms so wait a minute you're reducing it yeah no we don't want any well that's not that's not always physically possible it's okay let me just point out let me point out to the commission so let me you can when I look at this page six of 15 it shows that you have a catch Basin here uh it's yeah it's actually okay so so you got one catch B that's manhole that's that's the catch Basin is okay did you show me where the catch Bas actually the Overflow right here so that's that's the line right there so so what you're doing is you're having all the water go from here into here no so this is all sloped so the only water that could possibly go is is this little triangle that goes there and then on this side we have a catch Basin here and a catch Basin here so maybe there's like a little bit like that so we're talking about like micro areas we have our storm water right there this has a crown on the road directing it into the gutters this has a crossload directing it to the side of the catch base all I can tell you you're telling me you're telling me that the road is slow on this particular side I know I see a 76 Contour 75 contour and a 73 Contour here catch Basin here and here and the road's Crown to direct it to the gutters so again maybe you detail I can tell you that I'm just asking who's going to say that we have satisfied this comment I think do I go to do I go to the highway department and get them to write an email saying that they're good do I go back to the person who's reviewing storm water the peer reviewer and get them to say this is okay I think my suggestion yeah is you're going to need to catch all this influence we have two major problems right now yeah and we see this as being a similar problem so if you want to put if you want to put two basins here and have it reviewed by stor by by our engineer then we're going to be fine with that even if you took two basins and put them into this this pit as long as it'll accommodate it uh this detention Basin I think that's I think that's going to address Mr hayward's concern you do have two here I mean I I would and I don't know why you wouldn't have put two here you got two here this is the wi doesn't have a crown so it all goes to one side that's when you're looking at a plan the plan doesn't show a crown you got spot elevation you don't you got the fact that this is jogged that's a crown if it was straight across it'd be sloped if this that that the shape of the Contour so anyways I'm not I know how to solve drainage problems okay I just need a clear definition of the problem and I need the person Define who's going to approve my recommendation my suggestion would be if it's if it's Pap I'll take it I'll I'll rep present your concern and translate it and say they want something where we're not sending any runoff onto the street this is our proposed design and get them to sign off on it correct you if you send that to Pat yeah Pat is going to be sending that to highway to the highway director and then the highway director is going to review that and say okay that that seems to work and we should be okay okay that's and I think that's that'll the only area of impact is this particular one and unfortunately excuse me just get a train of thought because this road actually I think it goes up so the problem is that this water now is going to go back out into the street here and like I said we're confronted with two major problems I would I would be I would caution that it's not always possible to not send any water into the street um and our storm Water Analysis so some of it is going there now and that when we build this less will go there so we're improving the situation the thing is I understand your concerns here I have a I have a way of addressing it I'll put it together in a plan send it to Pat CC the highway department and we'll get both entities I don't agree I don't agree with the comment you'll be making it better because the lot's flat you mean you're raising it 5 feet so well right now no compared with what so right now there's a good amount of the site that drains to the street as as existing conditions I don't think so there is there is so it's been reviewed yeah okay maybe okay what was the other question you had um so so that's the process for the highway so those are the four entities planning police boorder of health and Highway that are to to comment on this so the only comment of those four is really the highway department on the drainage well I I think we we we we got a a similar failing with the Board of Health is why don't we have a separate plan I mean I think the board a separate permit it's not a storm water permit it's a it's a sewage on our plans we show the rims of all the surface structures that are part of the seic system so from a storm water grading standpoint you have all the information you need okay the on 266 where there's no notice of intent you're 100% correct we don't have any any jurisdiction over that there is some overlay with your in Li cuz we don't have a septic plan there you know so are we going to be guaranteed there's going to be no changes in elevation I mean to me just put the septic plan on and let's call it a day so that when this commission looks at it we can approve that and then it doesn't have to go back out to be so you have the full septic design on 266 now you do so I don't know what I got I got a May 13th plan has it been done before then no it's a it's a whole separate plan that was submitted but it's not on there see that's what we're dealing with well we we need the updated plans to come to us you have the new septic plan it has been submitted to you okay so um more sheets okay what you I think what you need to do is I think and you can pull the board if you want everything you're going to put on the lot you put on the plan so when we look at that and we approv that we've appr proven everything we're not going to approve the septic system per se but we know that your septic system this is a storm water you also got a notice of intent not for 266 so typic so typically yeah what conservation does is we take in all the comments from our colleagues and our other boards and departments you done and even with the storm water even though it's a separate permit even to approve that permit the plan has to be 1,00% complete for us to be confident in what's going forward and I don't want to speak for the chair but I think he's just as asking and it is a requirement that even under our ms4 and storm water that the plans be complete so we can vote on them very similar to our nois uh it's very different from the nois because the nois a public hearing process and advertising starts immediately in this case you go through the what is normally an entire public process before you even notify so it's it's it's very different than it's the proced I'll stop there I don't want very you guys have worked very hard this I think all I have some steps to act upon and I'll move those forward just get us a complete plan and we're not guessing like I say I haven't you know typically if you make you know if we ask for something to be reviewed and you make those revisions I think the comments say it's on page seven whatever um I don't want you to make 99 plans I'd rather you bring us a plan that's fully vetted that's it and we're going to look at that and we're going to say there's no Ming on top of the septic system it's not going to increase any drainage you're going to have six or eight inches of loone so we're going to get the absorption we're trying to make the process streamlined yep there's a it's new so just well I I hear I have a message there's a plan that's dated June 18th that ties out with the storm water comments that say all comments have been addressed and those things match okay so apparently you don't have the 68 plan yet so we'll get you the and wasn't in the office as a Monday and it'll be a new date because I'll have to work out this little drainage thing on a and which you should get the drainage thing squared away you need to address Highway Department's concerns on the width of the road I mean fire department the fire department I met with him yesterday okay I mean when I looked at that and I saw 16 ft it doesn't mean any the 618 plans have 20 ft on them so again and and it shows the fire Hy on there which has nothing to do with storm water no the fire hydrant I think he wanted added but I can tell you that when I viewed the plan and I saw six you had 22 or 24 ft in you had 16 ft out that doesn't fly because you don't meet it in the radiuses for the fire apparatus but you know that's not my jurisdiction again I think that's just there's a later plan that you don't have yet because the 20t is shown on Mr Mr chair um I have I have one question and I don't want to speak for the residents but we did have residents in the audience today that I do believe would have made comments on this today because they can't it's not a public hearing no I understand that but it's a public meeting and during the public meeting and under the open meting meeting law anything we have discussion on anyone in the audience can have discussion on so they could bring up concerns or different things like that just under the open meeting law but I believe they might have been here and even just to give you the heads up and Mr chair's already told you that we have two major problems I think they may have been here too because they want to make sure that this project isn't going to make sure is they're going to be ensure that their property is not flooded out anymore yeah the that's been brought the ABS have said that in the plan board hearings and we're not privy to that but we we have two major problems that they are they are exactly this way we have businesses that were built up 4 feet and my point is if you're interested in hearing what the public has to say notify them about a hearing as opposed to handle this stuff you you know as well as I do that the public is not interested in how big the detention Basin is they don't care that you're 2T above modeling okay they don't care about deep sumps they don't care about total suspended solids so that's what we have to worry about the regulation says this is what we got to do so we're not going to get into whether or not the the 5 foot wall out front or or even the the the I mean the fire chief showed me some architectural pictures that I wasn't aware of you must have sent some pictures out recently showing the wall and some improvements on the street okay you guys haven't no we Haven yeah we that's that's architecture architecture is okay so you so usually everything that goes to each department that are a part of the plans in the full plan underneath the Hal h and I apologize because this isn't my department and I forget what BW it is that x amount of copies go to each department and every time you make an amendment or a change a profess something to one you are supposed to provide it to everybody else so we need to have it even though planning board asked for just like if we ask for something it gets provided to the other departments because it's effective communication for us understand that but this is again all this stuff for storm water is happening prior to a hearing starting prior to a regular public process starting so it's it's Unique in that way it's Unique only in the sense that that storm water public has no concerns other than are you going to flood us yeah but that's a concern that's a concern okay so that's what we're going to address just saying that people probably have this concern they need to what going heard about your project before the hearings come up I appreciate your time I appreciate time I I got the message I think I know I have some steps I can act on fix fix the water prop and make sure that we all get C craw forward together we all need to get copies of the plan so that if if I'm sitting down with the planning board chair or the fire chief he doesn't show me something that I said I didn't know where the process end does the process end all the comments back when you get the comments back and then us to respond to comments back and forth like good you're so you want the full process to occur before we start notified before we notif it's like I responded to your email I think the commissioner is going to decide where it's in trust me we have enough to do we don't want to keep you on your and I know that you got I Ms Ms the the ms4s are okay just a different animal in of themselves too so it just complicates things so having everything 100% ironed out before that is go to work tomorrow thank you okay we got one we got three things to go we're going to pay the bills very hard to yeah I I need a motion to pay um Mel's going to leave that's okay um um any need motion to pay um I make a motion that we pay the Express Newspaper uh invoice A1 3866 I second all in favor I hi and I make a motion that we pay pgb engineering LLC for 19 White Island Road second I'll second that okay all in favor I motion to adjourn 4 motion to adjourn thank you Mr 122 [Music]