e e e well right e e e hey good evening everybody good evening how you doing it's weird not to be having this meeting in the dark huh yeah he could tell it's times have changed ready to get ready for some fishing well I'm ready for spring I can tell you that much oh yeah well we uh we did um you know not have very much know it's all my fault by the way because I bought a brand new snowbow two years ago and I've only used it once thank me for not having any snow thanks Jim yeah that's why I'm not going to buy another boat because I know everything would dry up I did so yeah you're welcome F did that uh groundhog see a shadow or whatever where are we at with that no but no he predicted early spring ah there we go yeah I'm pretty sure that the first day of spring is on the same day every year but that was a great movie though Groundhog Day oh man one of the best one of the best sometimes that's what it feels like you've been busy what's up Kim yeah yes I have I have been very busy well we're not um yeah well I would uh I would think at some point um there would be someone working with you in this stuff yeah Anna is here helping me of course well I know but um Anna is a huge help a third oh I know she is I could use a third person um the work volume here is as much if not more in Framingham and they have a staff of three oh yeah uh Mr chairman I I make a motion that we seriously bring a third person into the U into the department for the commission's work absolutely I can't tell me it's a budget thing considering what our budgets are anyway I'm G To Go mute all right I'm just managing the uh folks entering the meeting here cim excuse me get another minute uh this is hcam we're ready to go when you start okay thank you all right well we have a quorum uh at 7 o'clock so I'll call the meeting to order and read our pre cble script pursuant to chapter two of the acts of 2023 this March 12th meeting of the Hopkinson Conservation Commission will be conducted via remote means in accordance with applicable law this means that members of the public body as well as members of the public may ask access this meeting virtual via virtual means participants May access this meeting through the remote meeting link is posted on the meeting agenda and through the town's online calendar when required by law or Allowed by the chair person's wishing to provide public comment or otherwise participate in the meeting May do so by raising their hand or otherwise signaling their intent to speak excuse me uh this meeting is being recorded by hcam please take care to mute your microphone unless you have been recognized by the chair will now confirm attendance of members and staff please respond with present if you are on the call uh Melissa present J Janine present Ed Ted Ted is present yeah I don't think uh go ahead Anna sorry um we we were able to get Ed a computer today the town um so I'm hoping he's gonna get on soon maybe it's just kind of loading stuff up okay thanks Kim um um so Jim yeah I don't think Matt has joined yet and this is Jeff Barnes so staff Kim present Anna present and Joe with Lucas environmental present okay great thank you everyone okay work session item items documents for review Woodberry to eron's way this is an order of conditions Kim any final thoughts on this one or are we good to go should be good to go all right if I can get a motion to have Kim sign on behalf of the members present please I'll make that motion and a second second and we'll do the roll call vote Janine I Melissa I uh Jim hi Ted Ted is an i Matt's just coming in Anna and Jeff isn't I all right draft minutes for review we have January 23rd the January 23rd executive session minutes in January 31st did everyone have a chance to review those and are there any questions or comments if I can get a motion to approve the minutes of January 23rd the executive session minutes of January 23rd and the January 31st 2024 minutes please move no discuss and a second second and we'll do the roll call Melissa I yine uh can I say I for the 23rd both but not the 31st because I was not at that meeting yes yep okay so I'll abstain from the 31st got it thank you Janine uh Jim I Ted Ted isn't I uh Matt hi and Jeff is an i all right thank you okay um so the next item on the work session is the hopkington DPW Lake pa uh Lake Mas maspenock excuse me this is a request to use the toolbox items in the uh Lake treatment toolbox and I'm going to recuse myself and hand off the meeting to Melissa thanks Jeff you're welcome um all right so this is a work session item because we already have an order of conditions um for this work um I think if everybody remembers um and I I'm sure so we have a presentation here so I'm sure they'll go through it but um we issued an order condition for a toolbox of options for Lake management on weed for weed Management on Lake Masano and I this is the first time um the DPW is coming in front of us to present um their plan for the upcoming year and and requesting to use those tools so who do we have um from to present tonight Kim harri are you on the call I'm here hey Carrie hi we also have Joe baldiga who is uh chair of the citizens Advisory Group for the weed control plan okay yeah and uh we have um Dave Mitchell you here you want to introduce yourself Eric son is here Eric s The Advisory Group right Dave Mitchell you with us I thought I saw his name okay you might not be able to get through and um Dominic yes folks I uh Dominic mingal here project manager with Solitude Lake management yeah they Dave Mitchell is on the call just uh he might have trouble connecting just wanted to let everyone know thank you all right David is um the limnologist who's worked for the town and and helped out with some of the um vegetative surveys in the past so those are our Technical Resources for any questions um trying to use this as best I can so as you mentioned so my name is Carrie Reid I am the Hopkin DPW director um I've been in this position for about eight months and prior to that um or when I took the position I had a resigned from the Conservation Commission so I know most of you all from um being on the commission myself so just as um in terms of transparency it'll let people know so I was on the commission when we voted on the previous nois for this and I do live in the lake neighborhood although I do not AB but the lake my family is a member of the lake mpot preservation Association so as a result of all that I did talk with the state ethics commission um about whether it was appropriate for me and my new role to be able to present um to this and you know based on the feedback I got there doesn't seem to be a conflict of interest but just in the effort for all transparency I did um submit a disclosure of appearance of potential conflict of interest to the town manager and the town clerk before this meeting so I thought I'd start with that and then um as Kim had up I did put together a hopefully a short presentation um that I thought might help with the conversation um do you drive Kim or do I drive I am driving are you now just seeing the presentation I just had to kind of swap the monitors a little bit yes okay perfect all right awesome so I did want to start off with um Jess and this is good but thanking everybody that's worked on this um so far to get to here there's tons of volunteers and concerned citizens that have been very involved in this process all along and have spent a lot of time and effort and um we definitely appreciate all the work that's gone into this so for those of you who are not familiar and most of you are here's a quick overview of the lake it's located um in the south Western corner of town and um West Main Street kind of goes through the top of it mostly in Hopkinson but it's also in Upton and Milford and it's primarily residential all right what we got next awesome thank you so for a quick background because you'll hear a little bit about some of these dates um it is a manmade Lake created by the dam 1834 the first known weed study that we could find was conducted in the 1970s for the Conservation Commission in 2006 the town of poppington purchased the dam and the Public Works has been responsible on behalf of the Town um to operate and maintain the dam and then has taken on some responsibility for just overall lake management so as a result of that in 2015 the public works when they requested their operating budget for that year went before annual town meeting and as part of that had requested $60,000 as part of the operating budget for weed management specifically for herbicide treatment at which point there was a large discussion and town meeting voted to amend the budget and use that funding to develop weed management plan and they put that responsibility for the management on the select board in response to that the select board created the lake Mass Pano weed management citizen Advisory Group um which is also sometimes known as the citizen input Group which is called the cig it is made up of five volunteer residents that are appointed by the select board so since they were created they've been conducting annual weed surveys so this has been about 10 years now where we have some really good information about what we're seeing in the lake and how the weeds have been growing in 2016 the group presented the comprehensive weed management control plan it was developed it was approved by the select board it was a 5-year plan so as a result of the surveys and the plan in 2020 the Public Works submitted uh an noi for herbicide treatment to the Conservation Commission at that point and you all can correct me if I'm wrong but I think it was denied at a vote of four to three um so the noi was denied in order of conditions for denial was issued one of the main findings was that there wasn't enough of an alternative analysis conducted to show what other things can or should or could be used to deal with the weeds um so then the group went back based on some of those findings and what they've been seeing and because the fiveyear plan was up and updated the plan in 2021 and really took into heart some of those things that were recommended um and then went back to conservation in 2022 and this is what Melissa had mentioned earlier um with a new noi at which point an order of conditions was approved I believe the vote was four to zero with one abstaining um and that order conditions included a toolbox of different options and the Public Works needs to come before the Conservation Commission each year um to present which of the tools we plan to use that year and that's why we're here today all right next this was just I thought interesting you know we're talking about today but there's a long history of you know looking at the weeds concerned citizens about the weeds um so I just thought that was fun to put up there all right what we got next this these are slides that have been presented before at different public meetings um just a visual to show you some of the weeds that we were talking about a lot of the times of folks to ask which ones are native which ones are invasive species so there is a mix of invasive and Native species um and if anybody has very specific questions about what we're seeing what's there what's not um if if Dave's audio Works um he can answer those in much more detail um as we go along but just as a broad overview all right so one of the charges of The Advisory Group was to do public engagement um all their meetings are public they're published on the town website as you can see from here I threw up some of the headlines that we've seen in town this has been a very polarizing issue um there's been a lot of information people passionate on both sides so this is just you know um just to show you know how much the public has been engaged up to this point and those folks who are on the commission know this already all right what do we got so the toolbox under the order of conditions has several different activities that we can use the public Works does a regular draw down every year three they lower the lake level by 3 to five feet um this is under an order conditions this is done mostly for operations of Maintenance of the dam but it's been regularly happening for a long time because the water doesn't draw down low enough it doesn't really have any impact on the weeds um there's an extended draw down that can drop the lake levels down to eight feet which can be very um successful in weed management if we get extended long periods of cold because it freezes out the Roots um but it's highly dependent on the weather this is still the preferred method for the public works um the preferred method for weed management but what we've been experiencing lately is that it hasn't been as successful because we haven't had extended cold periods I think this past year there's been like three days where the lake was frozen over and last year it didn't freeze over at all um the other activities are Ben thic barriers and hand harvesting which can be successful on smaller localized are areas and um but they're not very successful overall and then mechanical harvesting which is a much more expensive higher requirement type of deal that we have not tried and then the herbicide treatment which is what we're talking about today so that's a summary I think the next slide should show um right so the next question we've been asked is okay so what's been H what's been used what's worked so far as I said DPW does regular draw down we can plan to continue to do the annual draw down um it doesn't have an impact on the weeds the extended draw down the last one was compl in 2022 we intend to do it again next year um we do come before the Conservation Commission to ask for that so this is the preferred method for treating the weeds but as I said it hasn't been successful the last times we've done it last time I believe Public Works tried one year it didn't work they tried again they got permission for like two years in a row and it still wasn't very successful the last time it was most successful was when we had a dry year so we didn't have a lot of rain so the water was already pretty low in the lake and then we had an extended period of cold um but as you all seen the weather patterns we just can't really rely on this although we Public Works have every intention to continue on with this as I mentioned the benic bearers and the Hand harvesting we have not done that as public works as a townwide level um but it has been done at a local level mostly by abutters that are using the the lake recreationally and kind of the swimming area they usually have AB butting their property um there have been some efforts for hand harvesting on a larger level like the lake bpto preservation Association has done some raking from boats and it can be successful but it is shortlived and it's very difficult c um and it's only really been very successful in small areas we have not tried mechanical harvesting it is not one of the recommended methods um especially for the weeds that we're seeing and we have not tried a herbicide treatment previously another question that we've been asked um is about water quality sampling so I put this slide together it's just a summary of some of the different sampling that we do so the lmpa with the citizen volunteers does an annual survey of the lake they do some water quality sampling and they look at the vegetation those reports are available through our website and through the lmp's website the Board of Health does sampling of the beach for the swimming beach as a requirement from the Department of Health so every year we have Sandy Beach that's open they do Beach sampling they've done um the health department has done some additional sampling they've done some sampling at the sediments at the the beach because of some concerns about um toxicity and some other things and have not found anything and they've done some samplings at outfalls near the beach where the runoff is going into Lake we also do sampling as requirement of our permit that's what this nippy ms4 is from the EPA so we do do some storm water runoff sampling we have not found anything in the S most of the sampling is been well dry weather we haven't seen that much run off um but we are required to sample as require um for that permit and then there's been other concerns that have been brought up um that you might hear about the drinking water the potential to impact drinking water and we are required to do a variety of sampling for our public drinking water sources and then in compliance with the order of conditions we will do pre- and post herbicide treatment sampling all right so here is the nitty-gritty and um Dominic you can chime in at any point if you feel like I'm missing something but um what we have here is an overview the figure as an overview of where the herbicide treatment might happen which is in this Northern Basin basically north of sandy beach and up to West Main Street which is where the lake is shallowest and where we've seen the most weed growth um this we're going to look at this entire area when we do this pre-survey um pre- sampling survey and the actual herbicide treatment will be spot treated based on what we see so it'll be targeted at areas where we're seeing the weeds and the weeds growth it's not just going to be applied over this entire area but we want to give you a visual of where it could go the herbicides that are being proposed are tribun Tribune and aqual K did I get that right right Tribune which is diquat and aquathol K which is end of all yes yep um and we're anticipating now if we get the approval from conservation and if we get approval or the thumbs up from the suck board um our goal would be to do this treatment in early June which is when we would anticipate starting to see you know a significant growth in the weeds did I miss anything guys no sounds good all right um I also want to point out that we will do a significant amount of Outreach if and when we are approved for the herbicide treatment I know this has been a concern in the past um so one of the conditions of the in the order conditions is to post signage to the abing uh around the abuts into at the beach and this and that this an example of what it could look like um to inform folks um and uh we'll reach out to social media we'll do it press release and all that good stuff Dominic did you mention I I forgot to mention though um how long after the herbicide is treated that it's considered you know safe for recreational use sure so uh the product labels for both of these products do not have any recreational restrictions we we have been discussing with the town um just as an extra precaution to close the lake or or at least the treated area of the lake on the day of the treatment uh and then Recreation swimming boating fishing can start uh really the next day um and again these are not restrictions on the product labels this is just extra precautionary uh and then as as you can see on the poster there um the label does require um a a a 24-hour restriction on livestock watering which is cons uh is is meant to be uh larger animals like cat and horses um not NE not necessarily dogs um there would be a 3-day restriction on using the treated area water from the treated area for portable use or cooking uh this does not apply to Wells it only applies to direct um direct use of the lake water um for for that purpose again that would be for 3 days after the treatment and irrigation from the the treated area using water uh for 5 days would be restricted for irrigation and that will all be the dates will all be uh filled in on the posters um and obviously we'll um all be clear in in all this uh notifications and Outreach yeah are there any questions for us hey should I chime in as well before just end the presentation who is i that's Joe he's the chair of the um citizen Advisory Group Joe baliga Melissa I can't see who's talking on my screen um sure if you have something to add to wrap up the presentation sure thank you Joe baldiga we live at 65 urst um we actually moved in in the winter of 2016 and that was the last time really that the draw down was effective we thought it was awesome um that controlling the weeds would be easy because we'd let the water down very low every couple years the weeds would all die and uh that draw down year 2016 was very effective it bought us a couple years unfortunately since then uh we really haven't had an effective draw down um and it just has gotten worse every year uh this morning I was actually raking up it's mid-march and I was raking up uh growing weeds live weeds uh down on the beach so the weeds are already growing so this year in particular there was no effective draw down um the citizens Advisory Group as Carri noted has been at this now almost 10 years and we have spent uh a tremendous amount of time and not just me my predecessors everybody on the committee um the DPW the select board have spent lots and lots of time assessing these issues trying to come up with some recommendation that would be PR Lake none of us are pro- herbicide or prochemical but we are PR Lake and as car noted none of the other Alternatives um we think are practi iCal solutions for really the worst part where the weed control I'm sorry where the weed growth is which is that North Basin none of the other uh tools in the toolbox will work for that area and if nothing is done to control the weeds in that area and we're already seeing this the weeds are migrating to uh other areas of the lake where we haven't seen the weeds before I've gone out on the surveys twice a year here now we're seeing weeds that are basically migrating from the north Basin into the deeper areas of the lake and the parts of the north Basin are getting closed off from the weed growth we're starting to see increased weed growth on the South Basin past Sandy Beach and if nothing is done uh it's just going to keep happening so I know there's been a lot of opposition to any kind of chemicals going into the lake I'm very sympathetic to that again none of us are prochemical but not the opposition to uh the proposed herbicide treatment really haven't offered any practical alternative uh Solutions we have engaged in education we've tried to minimize and we continue to try to minimize with the lmpa the uh use a fertilizer around the lake um there was runoff coming into the lake from as far away as School Street and stuff so it's not like you can just talk to the houses that are adjacent to the lake and that's a long-term project that will continue to make that effort but the thought of just doing nothing and having the lake get worse and worse it's going to be increasingly difficult the longer we go to control the weed growth so you've had our recommendation now for urb side treatment not just once but twice it's gotten shot down you know we're sort of at a loss it's the folks want to preserve the lake or they do they want to just let it continue to deteriorate so I what little hair I have left I pretty much pulled out going through this process and I I just you know we're very emotional about this because we really want to try to save the lake thank you um through the chair could I ask a question um hold on I think I just want to get through the presenters if you don't mind Janine sorry I thought that was the only presentation I will yeah no I appreciate the the presentation I thought that was very thorough um and matched up with all the information that was provided to the board thank you Carrie for putting that together you really got it all in a nutshell I think as far as what we've been through over the last 10 years um or so on on this board I think we've all been through it for the long haul um one person I see on the screen that I don't think we've heard from yet um is Sean molth our health director um are you here Sean to present us with some information we might not have oh oh I am here thank you okay um and I I don't really have a presentation per se but you know I put together um just a three-page set of notes that are all consistent with what was just presented it's um you know based um you know I have you know I was a zoologist I I had my classes in limnology because I'm I was an environmental scientist for 15 years um and um it seems it it seems to me that there are two issues being brought up there's a as Joe said we're not pro heride we're just trying to find a solution here so that we have a safe and functional water body um the the posos issue appears to have been addressed by the EPA in that um they test pesticides and herbicides for um um for posos they're not allowed to be used as an adjunct and they have um banned the use of the liners uh for the for the containers that are used to transport pesticides and herbicides from having posos so if posos is eliminated on that end you know this posos pesticide issue really shouldn't have any bearing on the town or on the lake and then be the other major source of posos in that area would be from septic systems because the majority of posos we're getting in our bodies or in our blood serum isn't from the tap water it's from the food we're eating and the messaging is just starting to go out to that extent um through the DPA and the D um right now so what when we went and put that entire area on um Municipal sewer that mitigated that issue and then I will I can say you know consistent with what Joe presented you guys have done a fantastic job at reducing the amount of chemicals and nutrients that are flowing into the um into the lake and that is um we can the fact that we're one of the only public beaches that haven't been closed lanwood and you know since I've been on U on board with the health department is a testament to all the the good work that you've done so you know I think that it really boils down to you know the pesticide issue and or the heride issue and I think you know based on what I've been reading um you know there isn't legal liability associated with uh the use of the products because they're both approved by um the you know Mass Department of a um Mass Department of Public Health and DP uh DB so um you know as long as they're following manufacturer's recommendations um I think it could be an effective tool and as long as we're communicating the risk and restricting access during you know the time of application and for a you know a short time post um application we should be in you know we should be okay okay I've got to say right thank you Sean I appreciate that as a commission I think in the past we've gotten a lot of questions about public health related to this and um you know our position is that the public health is really in the board of Health's hands not that's not our jurisdiction so I appreciate your time um and your expertise on those topics um and we'll definitely I think it's important for us to work you like you said it going forward making sure that the um application the notices things like that you know are coordinated and and we work together um on that aspect and I should also add that the res resents um when the residents are at spindle Island they they're using bottled water to drink so we don't have um like an ingestion issue or risk there and um the fact that the wells that are present on um what Pine Island Road off the top of my head there those are fairly deep and don't have any direct um uh direct you know hydrologic connection um with the lake so you know by the time any if if there was any residue it would have broken down and been broken down microbially before um it reached the well and I'd be happy to do well testing for anybody down there that you know you know had an issue or had a question okay thank you welcome um all right before I before I open it up um to questions from the board here from the Conservation Commission um I just have a I guess it's a kind of a statement I think as far as what the commission um what what our view has been and what we've kind of looked at this plan at our our approach the Conservation Commission continues I think to believe that watershed management is really um the most coste effective means um to reduce and eliminate future inputs of sediment nutrients to the lake lake Masano and the commission is committed to working I personally am um and I think the other members can chime in but it's committed to working with the select board the DPW AB budding land owners Lake Association groups and other interest groups Board of Health um to regulatory require where possible or otherwise encourage um low impact and smart development best management practices throughout the Watershed to reduce nutrients um and loading to the lake to help this issue um but I think I also acknowledge that you know the development around the lake isn't natural to the lake either and it's creating issues that um you know they get to a certain point and you have to take measures that you have to take with herbicides um to kind of get things back in balance and and check even if that's a short-term um mitigation me measure and these other things that we're going to continue to work on um with the DPW with the lake Management Group throughout the Watershed will hopefully continue that cycle so that um in my mind herbicides would be a shortterm um short-term tool and we can reach in and do other things around the lake um I'm going to open it up to the board and if anyone has any questions anyone has any thoughts on what I just said or questions for or DPW any of the technical references we have here tonight um to the through the chair uh I I agree with what you said about trying to sort of um you know best Lake management practices um but I did have a question on why diquat is one of the requested uh herbicides and not just end ofal I can answer that question through the share is that okay sure yes uh so we've reviewed the past uh plant studies and actually Solitude Lake management did some of the plant studies in the 90s uh we have been involved here and there and some of the discussions um really the choice of products here is based on the uh species um that are in this area so you know primarily um the the variable Mill foil um the large leaf paon wheat so these these two products both have been uh in use for you know I would I would very easily say is over 40 years um well understood products um used used widespread throughout uh the state and throughout the country um with you know no no apparent adverse effects so it's really the two products uh really were chosen to um provide the best control for the Target species that were uh present in in the management area right just one follow on question if I may through the chair um would just endol do the job that with the outcome that you're expecting um so actually the the interesting thing is the combination of daqua and endial will actually result in less less uh use less quantity of use um we find that the synergistic effects of using those two products together actually reduces the amount of product needed if we were to use just endial alone um we could we could really be looking at 10 to 15 gallons of the aquathol K product per acre uh versus the the proposed quantities which is one gallon of diquat per acre and three gallons of aquathol per acre um so that that's so so I guess the short question is uh we for the large leaf pawned we probably could use just endial but we' have to use a much higher rate um and I have we have not been very successful in managing variable mil foil with just endial so I think we would need the diquat herbicide to control the variable Mill foil so I think when you take those two things into account the the combination of the two products is um really been the chosen path here thank you does anyone else on the commission have any questions or comments yeah through through the chair this is Ed yes yes recognizing me yes I'm recognizing Ed Ed okay I have questions and observations um and I think I'll do my questions first if that's okay I was looking through the the data and I noticed in 2023 there was a big jump in the quantity of blad wart and the other thing I noticed was that fan wart sort of disappeared and I was curious if there was a natural cause for that or if it was just understood what was going on that would probably be a really great question for Dave Mitchell unfortunately he hasn't been able to get his audio to work so hey no hey folks hey excuse me so this is Joe baliga I have Dave Mitchell on my C phone by speaker so he can actually speak to answer questions so Dave the floor is yours thank you very much and my sincere apologies to both the commission and the audience for these technical difficulties we this know I've uh been trying at it very Val but going back to this question in terms of the changes we see in the Aquatic community over the years you'll notice that there is some changes some of the dominance tend to be very selective last year was a good year for blad W and again blad W is one that's found mostly in the Coes and such but again we see these things and again it may not you know this is based on the indication I've gotten I think for the attachment the commission has seeing is the ones with the frequency of our monitoring stations which ones are shown in 50% or more so even though bladder wart probably showed up more blad wart in itself is a very low um biov volume biomass um plant it's small it's kind of uh found on the bottom it's there but it's not in the sense of contributing lots of density so again the focus of the Aquatic vegetation the aquatic vegetation management control is mostly on those plants that not only are frequently found are widespread and basically go up much more into the water column and therefore have more much more of an impact on the ecology than something that's more of a bottom a bottom uh dweller or something that has uh not much structure to it if that makes sense so you can think about these things with different kinds of plants you know different kinds of weeds and all those sorts of stuff they have different growth characteristics and blad wart and I think I don't know talked a few people it was a good year for Blart um but these these Lakes have some you know dynamic nature to them you can't always predict reliably exactly what's going to come up and when um I think you can see there's some other trends of sometimes we've seen things drop out and other things come back over the year we've been doing this since 2016 so we also encounter a lot of variability in terms of the growth seasons in terms of the draw down in terms of what happens during the springtime which can be a critical critical path so that may explain some of the variability seeing I wouldn't necessarily taking one year is a definitive Trend but I think if you look at the the the track record in terms of the variable mil foil in terms of largely pondweed a niad is there niad is another one that is very low in the water column does not lead to that kind of an ecological impact so I think that's my response I hope that answered the question you had sir yeah thank you and and I appreciate the effort you've gone to and I had to go through just about as much of an effort because the link did not work for my computer so I had to work around the corner my observation I've lived on lake whiteall for 40 years well not on it but obviously beside it and in that time along the westly side of Lake whiteall as a consequence of the subdivision that was built up on the westly side of Lake whiteall I've seen a massive increase in a variety of weeds um and the the um outflow from the Ral Road uh storm drain um I took some pictures recently and the amount of algae growing in there now was quite astounding so clearly the the things that people put on their lawns in the Watershed has a major major impact and how we control that or educate people I'm all ears and that's the the my primary yeah pretty much that's it thank you right thanks Ed um anyone else from the commission okay um I'm GNA move on to some public comment I think if we can kind of keep our public comments to um new information and not rehashing things from previous meetings um that would be great and two minutes per person so that we can get out of here before midnight because we have other things on the agenda as well um I think Ken is that a Ken had a hand up for a little while here yeah I've got my hand up so uh can you he can you just provide your name and address for the record my name is Ken Parker 69 Clinton Street I've pretty got pretty much got two questions one is it sounds great that uh so on the P issue it sounds great that new bottles uh are not no longer going to contain past because uh they've made in uh changes to what's possible but my question is uh is what's going to be applied in June going to be from new bottles or from older ones that if I mean I I assume there's a supply stream there and uh I worry that maybe some older bottles that still have past may be amongst those used so I would hope that you guys just test what goes in for PE uh to to determine whether there's p in there whether or not there ought to be it'd be great if there ought not be I mean that would be great but what we really care about is are there really any pasts there my second question has to do if you treat uh uh plants tar to kill plants in the north area of the lake then you're stopping those plants from absorbing nutrients potentially and I wonder if that might spur those spur plants in other parts of the lake to grow better because now the nutrients that would have normally been taken up by the the dead ones are now going to be available to uh to cause the plants to grow better in other parts of the lake I don't know whether that's possible or not it just seems fairly reasonable to me to expect that um is that a question that questions that would be appropriate to kick over to you Dominic yeah I think I could certainly answer the first question maybe Dave Dave can take a crack at the second question um so you know up to this point we have not ever been notified that any of the particular products that we use in the aquatics Market have have uh the any P has been found in the containers uh we do uh we do order we don't we don't keep these products in inventory over the winter so that we do order these products fresh um from the manufacturers um in the spring um so these the products that will be used at Lake mpano will be H will be have delivered to us from the manufacturers um you know in the next month or so so so it be a good idea to keep a little bit of it and see whether there's PF in it yes Dave do you want to address a second question sure through the chair the response to the question about what's coming into the north Bas and there's two basically things you you've identified and it's been brought up already in the meeting about how sediments and nutrients are coming in through storm water or um basically over the the land uh U methods of delivery as well and again it's been mentioned already correctly that reduction of these at the source is the best treatment but given they're coming in the fact is that generally plant macrofit the larger plants get the most of their nutrition not from the water column itself but from sediments so in terms of them acting as a c or a some sort of a filter for some of the nutrients in the dissolve phase probably less effective than that uh what you probably will see those things going Downstream this is a kind of you know a flowthrough system so I don't think necessarily it will lead to more growth of mccrites later one thing that uh is been brought out in terms of also just keeping the SS one thing the removal of some of the macroides do they tend to retain sediments and therefore they grow the organic content below them it's kind of a self fertilizing type of method so reduction of a few of those probably won't help in that sense but in a lot of cases you shouldn't see you know and given the proportion of the macroy of the entire Lake retreating with um I don't think there'll be any kind of a significant increase in the um the quality Lake a lot of the mccrites outside say go in the South Bas and a lot of those are actually more limited by the Topography of the bottom they're really low on light so nutrients may not be this suffering so I think in terms of um any kind of predictability this I would say it' be very unusual and again we'd have to know by looking at kind don't know the actual amount of nutrients coming in and seeing what's going out and seeing if there's any an issue that but I but again my my general answer is it should not affect or accelerate growth elsewhere that that does that answer your question sir thanks thanks for your answer I guess time will tell um Don Southerland you have a question or a comment uh yes hi I'm Don souland 205 Winter Street I'm the chair of the environmental uh working group at the Hopkinton sustainable green committee um uh and for the record the uh committee is opposed to the use of herbicides uh We've provided the uh the committee uh uh our research and our statement with sources on that reasoning I wanted to uh bring up a couple things one the Department of Health brings up the fact that diquat is banned in Europe because um and it is because it uh impacts Aquatic Life harmful to Har U that was the reason for the ban and also it was a banned for uh human health concerns uh just because it's used in the US doesn't mean it's safe um the the the other issue is the P now the uh pasas issue isn't new to the commission uh they've requested it for the uh Turf plane fields on on Fruit Street by a third-party testing uh request uh for um those materials potential to have P Fest by a third party request I'm wondering why the commission wouldn't require a similar uh request for past testing as they did for the Fruit Street fields and that would entail the new updating of the uh uh the range of past that has been expanded uh as of 2014 I'm sorry 2024 uh by the EPA and the and the other issue I want to bring up is that the uh our group has contacted uh mdar the mass Metts pesticide board and subcommittee and the DP and they've confirmed that currently pasas is permitted in pesticides and aquafer herbicides uh that documentation has been provided but to the commission um it's also been confirmed that it's also permitted in inert ingredients as well as active ingredients inert isn't required by law to be disclosed so there isn't really full disclosure on or transparency on uh whether or not pasas is in the uh planned herbicides um also I want to commend the committee for its extensive work and the neighborhood commission Community groups for for their extensive work and it's for that reason um that our group is involved uh because of the concern for the ecosystem that's uh being referred to here as late Mass p and that's that's been the concern uh that uh one I'm wondering why the commission isn't requiring a third-party testing uh of proposed herbicides as they did for the uh Fruit Street fields and also uh U we want to stress the fact that we're in opposition based on the fact that our contacts with mdor and the Department of Environmental Protection confirmed that pasas is currently being manufactured and used in in herbicides and pesticides registered in the United States and in Massachusetts thank you thank you Don um Kim just had up on the screen the letter that was provided um by the sustainable green committee um there it was provided to the board it's in the the public record um if everyone had a chance to read it and um I think and I might ask Sean for his opinion as well um from the Board of Health perspective but it in in my in my thoughts as far as what's tested and what's not for P I think we're all um you know the turf the the herbicides that are being applied and proposed are all regulated through EPA and mass D and the Conservation Commission relies on those agencies um you know to do testing and to approve those products so I believe that they that is a significant vetting system that the commission um relies on those products are used in other um water bodies throughout the state um versus the turf field being within the wellhe head protection area um rate adjacent to our wells um that was a different concern I think at the time for the commission um when that that product was being being put down um Sean do you have anything to to add to that or I misunderstanding I I'm I'm looking at the EPA document right now that says that um that it's not approved for use um it's not approved for use as an iner ingredient and um that as of December 22 um there uh posos products were no longer uh um to be present in any registered pesticide product but I mean I I could certainly talked to mdar and the DP um we you know we know that all the all of the pesticide product specifically mosquito um uh mosquito a mosquito pesticide that was to be aerial sprayed that was found to contain um posos as a result of it being present in the liner that has been that's no longer or as soon as they found it it was pulled um the existing stock was pulled and held um and couldn't be used um in any uh in any aerial application but um but everything that I'm reading right here in this EPA document says it it has been banned but but I'm you know I'm more than happy to do a little homework and uh um and take a look at it okay um and the dquad question still is outstanding if it's banned in Europe because of harm to humans and um Aquatic Life why would we use it uh I know we talked a lot about the um those standards in the previous previous hearings and um I appreciate that I think um it's something that given the current current standards current recommendations um the board upholds the policies of EPA and D um and if anyone else on the board um had any questions or comments I'd love to hear them but um my personal opinion is you know we're we're here under the Wetland protection act in our own bylaw and um we're looking at products that are approved by for use here in the United States by our EPA and DP and that's kind of what we have for for science to to to rely on um I I think it would be as I had said in in the beginning I think that the Conservation Commission is definitely shares interests with um the green sustainability committee the Board of Health and protecting the environment and things that go into it and I think as these things evolve um on a townwide basis not just related to Lake mpano I think that working together to look at at at data and um work on policies and regulations um for these products and and what we apply to our systems throughout Town um our conversations and and things that I think we should be doing and collaborating on um at this point in time right now I think the best information that I have to go on is is D and epa's um approved products um um I'm going to go to Jamie who has a had a hand up for a little while here thank you um so I think it's my name's Jamie gonalves we'll start off with that um I live at 92 Downey Street and I'm the president of Lake mpov preservation Association and former uh member of the cig uh We've studied this for many years now um and I I think it's something that we need to make sure that we reiterate every time we have these hearings is that we're not killing off all the weeds we are retarding some of the weeds growth it's not a complete it's not going to be a complete desert um when the after the application it's just a simply retarding the growth of the weeds and I think that's um I think there's been some misconception out there regard regarding that um and then as far as the the P uh contamination um I don't think there's been any indication that any of the either of those chemicals that have been uh that suggested to be used uh have had any positive uh tests uh from of peach past as far as I can tell um I did do some research and and found um some some issues with some other uh herbicides or some pesticides I should say but not directly on um her those particular herbicides so those are my two comments uh I think it's important that we move forward with this as best we can um and if I'm going to make a suggestion that if we have um that if past contamination of the herbicide is an issue that the uh Mission can request um samples be collected and um analyzed prior to its application as you know as an option to rule that out thank you thanks um let's see I Carol I see hand up for Carol esler oh maybe you unmuted me um Carol esler 16 o curst um we have a dock on uh the north Basin and um basically what we have here is two Town boards with differing opinions um on page 50 of the town's climate action plan you can go on the SGC webs side um that we do not support the use of herbicides in like Mass Pano um it's neither green nor sustainable we won't go into all of what's there on the climate action plan but the first question I have is why isn't Hydro raking in the toolbox Hydro raking is the use of much smaller weed harvesting machines it was used in the 90s it could be quite effective in the short term with the added benefit of not having toxins remain in the soil as they would with the herbicides and I'm wondering why Hydro raking H isn't in the toolbox and why haven't all potential non-toxic methods been tried at this point before turning to herbicides testing for pfus seems to be the bare minimum that we can do to avoid a large scale spreading of dangerous chemicals the quickest and cheapest in the short term does not often stand up to the test of time the history of scientists approving chemicals and later learning that harm is being done is lengthy and I won't go into it it seems to me that we have both a democratic and excuse me a philosophical issue here two-thirds of the Town voted down the use of herbicides in our lakes in 2015 I believe that most of us here in hopkington would not approve of Co toxic chemicals spread on our lands and Waters if given the chance to vote again some of us would argue that Landscapes and watersheds have rights like humans do we are all part of an interdependent Web of Life let's respect our Lake and do better let's manage Our Town water for the benefit of biodiversity and health of the planet rather than the convenience of Some Humans I urge you to deny the permit for herbicides and remember Reuse Recycle the RS well there's more RS now they include repairing and repurposing but also respecting and respecting this water shed is so very important and I urge you to respect and to listen to both groups and both boards who have very strong opinions about this thank you for the chair um Dave to respond that's okay uh just a moment if I can have a minute to respond first um I do know that Hydro raking is me the same as mechanical harvesting or it's a type of mechanical harvesting so that is a tool in the tool boox um when Carrie went through our presentation that was the second to last tool um I know it hasn't been tried yet it was stated in the presentation that it is extremely expensive and not applicable for this particular area of the lake um but if Dave or Carrie wanted to expand on that reasoning feel free U through the chair yes I'm just what you said um it's not a cost-effective method for the particular weeds that we're looking at but we will continue to reach out and work with um Watershed associations and volunteer groups if that's something that we want to pursue I know that the ORS Watershed group um has done efforts um with mechanical harvesting and and in the past with different water bodies it usually focuses on like floating um weeds but we'd be happy to partner with you know nonprofit organizations that are interested in that but it's just not something that would be cost-effective and that the town is recommending to do or the public works is recommending to do on a lake wide um option right now but as you mentioned it is allowable underneath the order of conditions as one of the tools in the toolbox and that um yeah that's all happen that one can I respond briefly and then clue in Mr Mitchell through the chair um yes Joe Bala I'm sorry so an Advisory Group um so so the opponents for the herbicide have uh on at several meetings suggested why don't we spend more time looking at some of those other Alternatives in the toolbox we have repeatedly uh shared with them how we have spent extensive amount of time looking at those Alternatives particularly mechanical harvesting we've had those discussions many times as to why that's inappropriate and not practical for the north Basin despite that they keep coming back and saying the same thing why don't we try it well we don't try it because it's not practical or costeffective for the north Basin anyway I will shut up on that point it's just we've we've had numerous conversations they just don't want to hear it so Mr Mitchell I think would like to respond uh to some of what was said is that okay yeah Dave if you have like a minute I did respond to two I think very quickly for hydro raking Hydro raking is an activity that is generally reserved because of expense and its messiness for taking out things that need particular removal deep rooted plants such as water lies and not such is not considered an overall harvesting method uh pretty much it works along shorelines it's not for broad-based application in a wide Basin second thing is that lately that the D has been looking very carefully at this is becoming essentially a uh secondhand type of dredging and are now likely to be requiring additional permits and testing above and beyond what's currently um required if you deserve more than 100 cubic yards of sediment which isn't hard the second one in terms of just overall the statement I just want to bring out the cases that the commission is correctly looking at the water po the um WPA interest and one of the things has been suggested by the the document provided by the green committee and I respect their ability to uh put forth an advocacy position for what they believe in and the people on the committee include people I know are very interested in the overall um health of the lake but pretty much in terms of how they see their perspective one other thing that has not been considered by all of this is the presence of pasas in pesticides whether it's right now it has been alleged to be there we don't have actually scientific evidence but it's a pesticide and I'm buing is it's possible to happen how level what levels will result in they're talking about generational alteration and impacts to the lake um you have to look at what the science says in terms of what is the safe levels and the EPA establish these things through what called aquatic quality criteria what concentrations in the water colmer considered to be safe for that right now we don't know what lake Masano is um based on recent work by the mass D in a monitoring effort in the U just published in December of 2023 they're finding stuff in many places which every body body including all those in hop probably have pasas but I was interested in looking what's a number for comparison uh it came out I guess in a local newspaper that the water wells and Hopkin in which reports is a great interest to everyone there was a and I'll refer this to Carrie possibly a concentration of 36 nanograms per liter does that ring any Bell carry I'm not sure if I've got that right but just for comparison this is groundwater which tends to have more concentrations it doesn't move as fast as compared to an Open Water Lake we have water movement and all that if you look at care what 36 nanograms per liter I got to remember nanograms is a huge number um I think some of the comparison of the proportion if you had a patch two and a half inches wide that would compare in proportion to 250 square miles it's 10 to the minus 9th so if comparison to if I presuppose for our sake of this argument using the 36 nanograms they found in groundwater in the lake it is still 2,000 times lower than the concentrations provided by EPA through their testing of having no adverse impacts for aquatic life that's in the this draft aquatic criteria in 2022 and I would suggest the board of health could be suggested that way but again they're suggesting that simply pasas being in the lake is going to lead to impacts that will affect adversely the water uh the the Wetland protection act interest and there just is not it's not even orders of magnitude so they have to be careful about their assertions and lastly again as they've been before there is so in terms of looking at the concentration this is going to be applied to Lake for a brief period of one day or two and then because of half life will DEC composed so again the actual amount of chemical to be added to the lake versus the dilution that flow through Lake diminish the concentration so I think it's very hard to make this I don't think you can make this assertion and I'm going over my two minutes I'll shut up uh that this is going to lead to expected um impacts there's just no basis for saying that okay thank you um at at this at this point in time I think we um I I'd rather not go into speculation especially on um you know the future and past I know in town like I said um I the one thing I will say about the previous comment is I don't think that we have two boards against each other I think that we have two boards that have similar interests and um you know hopefully going forward we can we can work together on some of these issues but right now for tonight um we just need to make a decision on you know this request that's in front of us um can I give you one minute because we had two minutes from you before and then um make a quick up I mean if if you're allowing me to speak yeah a pfast bio accumulate that's why they're dangerous if they stayed at their normal concentration if they stayed at 20 PPM it wouldn't be a problem but they B accumulate up a thousand fold readily into people into the fish and if you eat fish that have a thousand times more than that then you start getting a lot of pasas in your body so um you're right if if you didn't if nobody wanted to eat any of the fish in there maybe it wouldn't matter very much and I guess I've got enough mercury in there so that's a problem anyway but I just don't think it's a good idea to make make uh pollution problems worse that's all I have to say okay thank you um Kim did you have something from before I feel like you were GNA say something and then um I'm all set it's not anything that hasn't already been discussed okay um all right so I you want to does anyone else on the commission have anything else any other last minute questions I think we should put this to a vote I actually I just I guess I one more thing um to the chair so I guess there some conf I'm a little bit confused on so if you know if e e I think I got kicked out I think I thought I got kicked out think were're frozen for a couple minutes there but they're back okay yeah we had some technical difficulties in Melissa I apologize that's okay um the last thing I heard was just Janine you wanted to clarify something I heard nothing else after that ah okay so um I was wondering is so you know uh masty EP has said there is no Pas Faz in the herdes anymore so can we take that as like a certification equivalent of a third party test if they say there are no pasas in there it's sort of going back to the comment I would sort of feel comfortable if we had a third party said there's no pasas yeah from I don't know that I feel comfortable saying that or I don't don't know that I've seen documentation I don't think anybody can say there's no pfass in anything it's it's such a you know it's everywhere um I don't know if anyone knows is there a way to test the chemicals that are being applied before they're applied for p is that a reasonable request by the commission is that something that can be done I I don't know what the timeline is on sure can be done well of course anything yes is it reasonable it can be done it's it's a it's a question oh you're on mute Ken yeah I think it can be done uh I'm I'm just asking get a sample of stuff and see if you know it' be great if you could test before I know the time's limit and I don't know that the technology for doing it is is all established starting from the the concentrate it's well established for measuring and are becoming possible and I think it' just be a good idea to keep some of the stuff and make sure that if there is any if there is a beast pulse in the lake then you can say where it came from um but that's all that's all that's I can say um the water quality testing or the testing that's that's done after the sampling I know we have follow-up sampling regime um it probably does not include P right now I'm guessing correct and we didn't take and we wouldn't have taken that as a pre pre screening um either correct we would not have of course we as part of the order um order of conditions we are required to do pre and post survey sampling um I don't know how exactly we would do PRP fast because most of the sampling regimes are focused on drinking water um but we can explore that as an option me I in my personal opinion you know I rely on the DP and EPA so I don't think that we as the town of Hopkin are going to be able to come up with a or I should say me um and Public Works are going to be able to come up with a regime that's more conclusive than DS but we can see okay one one last comment if if you can hear uh there's a I I uh our committee is putting a warrant on the town uh you know a town meeting to for more money to be available for tests of this sort and the reason we're doing that is to make it easier to do tests of this sort so just uh heads up on that okay um all right Janine I don't know if that gives you any there but um I think at this moment in time all right we have one hand Lori I think this is the last comment here hi can you hear me yes hi my name is Lori Barnes I live at 23 amarse Road and I obviously live on the lake my kids have been raised here I think we're everyone in our family is environmentally conscious we are um definitely not Pro herbicides pesticides and um I think the main thing for me being a resident in hopkington for probably over I think 20 24 years or so I think my biggest thing is that I've come to learn that we have qualified people we have qualified volunteers we have qualified um departments that we reach to like we're saying for you know we have the Mass Department um D doing all this research for us and things that we can rely on and I think that we really just need to trust the process I think that you know spinning the wheels and kind of just going in circles you know regardless of what the decision is tonight I think that we need to as a community come together and look at the facts and look at who we have for resources and use them to the best of our abilities and make decisions so I think regardless of what's decided just the last comment on going on and on and on and looking for other things to try to prove what the D's already done is just seems to be a waste of of resources and time that's all thank you appreciate that all right uh let's go ahead and put it to a vote and I'll say I'm committed to working you know going forward with the sustainability committee um DPW Board of Health you know for townwide issues on on P pass and application to our waterways and in resource areas um but for the time being I just wanted to double check so everyone on the on the commission here has been through the whole hearing process except as Carrie noted she stepped off the board Matt my um you took Carrie's role um and you were provided all the documents I just wanted to ask you if you feel comfortable with the materials that you reviewed with present tonight L this is Ed uh oh everybody seems to be loost yeah I'm frozen as here we go him's back got a love B you come back Kim are you here I'm here can you hear me okay yeah um just want to comment I've done a lot more reading than what I spoke about and I am very comfortable thank you Ed I'm not sure who can hear that yet hang on technical difficulties tonight is everybody back do we have Melissa here looks like we have 19 so we're we' we're missing about half of the people that were on the call I think you must didn't like what we're talking about it's hang in I think we're missing Jeff as well yeah no Melissa no Jeff yeah which I'm not really sure why the meeting isn't shut off if Jeff isn't here yeah I got a message that it switched the host yeah Jeff says he's having issues I just switched back to him as the host so hopefully that means he's coming back in maybe we can have I'm back in thank you maybe we can have Melissa take over the um the host Zoom I dig it it wasn't just me who got booted there okay I I think it's issues with Jeff and Jeff is hosting the meeting um yeah sorry Kim I don't know what's going on but honestly each time I've gotten booted my whole internet's gone down so there's some something weird going on yeah I don't think it's my like internet here um at home it's G to be something else going on with the town connection for Zoom I think um sorry Melissa go ahead I'm not sure we got Melissa back yet is is she in the waiting room Jeff she is she's coming in now Kim okay back did you call my name for a vote all right team so we we were checking in with Matt to see if he felt comfortable with the materials um and then we're gonna move it forward and get through it before we get kicked out again yeah so did you hear anything I said or it kicked out all right so yes I've had an opportunity over the last couple of weeks to review the order that was issued uh to the DPW I've also taken the opportunity to review the guidance and documentation out there that's been provided by D DCR and EPA and and feel comfortable voting tonight okay awesome Let's Do It um so can I get a motion and I guess the motion would be Kim correct me if I missed step but we're looking for a motion to approve the proposal by the DPW for application of herbicides as specified in the order of conditions and following all um conditions of the order related to that yeah I might broaden it a little bit and say um a motion to approve the dpw's proposed treatment plan for the year of 2024 as specified in their request um because I believe that also still includes the draw down that they that they want to do this winter right okay second a second all right um all in favor I got to do the roll call here so Ted I Janine I Matt I Ed I Jeff you're abstaining correct correct myself am and I I think I got and Jim I and then Ed I I think I got Ed oh did you okay sorry yeah okay so that carries um that I'm gonna support yeah thank you for all everyone's work and um yeah we look forward to working with the DPW like I said all the groups involved Board of Health um on the whole Watershed plan um this year next year going forward so I will very happily turn it back over to Jeff now thanks Melissa um okay so H Kim I apologize I don't know what's going on with the internet connection um but hopefully it won't happen again moving along something to do with the town so if we get blocked off we should just try to jump on again and hopefully we can get through this meeting the rest of it faster okay sounds good um okay so Kelly so there's no new hearings this week um or for this meeting so we'll move on to continued hearings we have Kelly Nine Montana road this is an amended notice of intent as a continuation for a second driveway um Kim did you want to give us an update as to where we are with this application please all righty here we are okay so this was a request for an amendment to an existing notice of intent the original notice of intent was the construction of the single family dwelling the Abed was to add this driveway which connected to Maple Street extension the commission did review it at our last meeting and um they noted that it was an increase of 1,720 square feet of impervious surface in the buffer zone so the commission did request that the buffer zone um restoration area adjacent to this stream in the back of the lot was expanded so the applicant originally agreed to a 10 foot wide kind of buffer strip and it's now been expanded by 5et so it's a total of 15 feet wide off of the edge of the intermittent stream in the back the applicant also moved The pib Medallion markers up to match the new limits of the permanently uh or permanent Conservation Area and the label was added um conservation enhancement area I believe maybe I have the wrong s plans I believe the applicant added the word permanent to it I had requested that and uh they also proposed a few plantings I believe there's six plantings here yeah Winterberry witch hazel and mountain laurel um so I once I find the plan that says permanent um I am I'm all set and I think they checked all the the boxes that they had written down on my notes for last time okay great thank you Kim I'll open it up to questions comments from the commission all right no questions or comments from commission members other any questions or comments from the public okay uh if I can get a motion to close and approve the amended notice of intent for nine Montana road Kelly for the continuation or the continued notice of intent for the second driveway please so moved and a second second and we'll do the roll call Melissa uh hi Ted Ted isn't I Ed Jim hi and I'm and I uh Ed you with us still okay uh we'll move on also I'm also an i oh sorry Matt I missed you it's all good I apologize buddy um okay having all sorts of issues tonight um okay Woodson so the motion passes uh thank you folks appreciate that uh Woodson 41 Front Street this is a continuation of the notice of intent for an addition in deck Kim did you want to give us a quick update please absolutely so last time we saw this site um we had talked about some type of pib or Medallion um and the applicant has responded by uh doing this split real fence um and labeling it as the permanent and movable barrier and I understand the applicant is amendable to a fixing the pib medallions to it but we can um verify tonight uh the erosion control limits were expanded to protect ER any erosion sentation that would run into the street and um last time we spoke we did not have the D file number now we do the D the D issued the file number with no comments and I have a note here for a special condition for a construction entrance exit apron so I'm also recommending um issuance of the order of conditions on this one as well okay thank you Kim um questions comments ments from commission members questions uh yes Ed go ahead um there's a typo on this page I don't know if it's significant it says 125 foot bur from the potential Valley potential Vernal pool you might want to change that to buffer got it uh I mean the applicant just uh correct it and pen and initial it that work yeah I think that's fine I mean it's a it's a uh um you know it's a fairly minor um misspelling so I don't think that's an issue um I think it's inferred it's 125 foot buffer from the potential Vernal pool so I think that's good we can just have the applean either correct it and pen and initial it or you know send the revised plan to Kim Kim you good with that yeah I'm not too worried yeah okay thank you Ed so like do I get credit you know my mother was an English teacher you do we'll put a sticker on it and uh send it to you and you get a 100 grade of a 100 okay questions comments from the public all right if I can get a motion to close and approve the uh notice of intent for 41 Front Street I make that motion and Well Done Ed please and we'll do the roll call Melissa hi Janine hi Ted Ted is I Ed I Matt I Jim I and I'm and I all right hopkington Stone and garden 28 Lumber Street this is a notice of intent um I think it's been a while since we've heard from the applicant and his consultant we have someone on the call to give us an update yeah got a little bit of an echo Ryan but go ahead okay um so yeah we haven't been I think or months since um we've made some pretty changes I the available otherwise I have I can share my screen which easier want look at it Ryan can you share your screen yes yes I saw that you had set the plan but honestly to tell you the truth I thought it was the same plan as as a few months ago yeah I mean it looks very similar have both plans up so so this is the previous plan one that we submitted um if you remember so we proposing to fill 490t this IW here um and after you know the com Luc environmental very detailed one we went back to drawing board and tried to produce that as much as possible so here is the new plan um that everybody right one um so I'll zoom in a little bit see a closer so we basically removed previously there was 14 wide drop off sh that down we move the infiltration systems um they used to be in the middle to each side so we could fit those over here and then reduce you know of the parking in this area we're also proposing to do raining wall on this section here and which has reduced the proposed by So currently it's still proposed in4 small um you know are close up here so there's not much so this is this is really just um a general overview of the site uh plan as proposed we hav made a formal all the materials that the commissioned we are fin that up and should be to you you know this next week next we know that you Haven any time this so this is more just a quick presentation you what has changed so far um go down so now are similar places they're just a little smaller still still meet the one and a half to one ratio we still meet um you know the required storm water management standards and the cubic the Cub placement forf you know not increase flooding and then just on this last page here one of the comments was to show you know profile crosssection profile of the replication areas um so that be seen here so um you know if there's any questions right now you know I know you know this is first but any questions comments tose you know we'll uh be more detailed and have more information okay thanks Ryan I don't have any questions or comments at this point um but haven't had a chance to go through this yet so let me just open up to the other commission members so the chair this is Ed yes Ed I have an echo in my head and I'm getting a headache from that I could make almost nothing out of that talk I'm sorry okay um thanks Ed yeah was a little difficult Ryan but um you know we'll continue this out to the next hearing but let me just ask Kim and Joe if there were any questions that they had um here at this point um I just wanted to comment uh for your benefit Ryan so I would say um if you could get revised materials to us whatever you're officially submitting by the 19th at the least um because the commission will probably want Lucas um environmental to take another look at it ahead meeting thank you sorry that trure side all right thank you uh yes go ahead um I wonder also um Ryan adding on to what Kim said especially given how difficult it is to understand you tonight when we get this new plan could you give us a bullet list of the change you talked about just now for us to take a look at next time yes abely all the responses to comments from we'll go through all that great thank you that would be really helpful um okay other questions from the commission comments okay uh so our next meeting is March 26th Ryan is that going to give you enough time yes I okay if I get a motion to continue the hopkington stone in Garden notice of intent discussion to March 26th please Ted and was a second second oh all right and we'll do the roll call Melissa hi Janine I Ted Ted is an i Ed I Matt hi Jim hi and d and I okay thank you Ryan if you can take care of those te techn technical difficulties for the next meeting that would be appreciated sure thank youone y thank you uh okay so back to the work session items we have uh one Fox Hollow Road this is a request for an extension permit Kim did you want to give us a little background sure um so I am working with these homeowners to help them get to the Finish Line um so I am going to recommend the extension probably but not until um the applicant repairs Andor replaces their erosion controls so we're going to um I recommend we table this until the the next meeting and and hopefully we'll we'll have all those items buttoned up by then okay so the site is not um stable at this point the erosion controls are in disrepair C correct um so we would like to I don't know if do we have someone on the call I don't think so they requested that this discussion be continued um when I let them know that I would I would not recommend issuance um so I think their you know their intention is to address it got it okay okay so we'll just table this in the next meeting then and hopefully we'll have the erosion controls buttoned up at that point um okay 47 Stony Brook this is a request for a two-year extension permit Kim yep so this one we are I am going to recommend um extension the applicant reached out to us they um were unable to finish their Pool and Patio area which is in jurisdiction um so they're looking for an extension uh Anna went out and checked the erosion controls on the site again and uh it appears to be stable um with no concerns about erosion at this point so I would recommend the the extension here okay if I get a motion to approve the request for the two-year extension for 47 Stony Brook mov and the second second all right I think Ted to the punch there Ed will do the roll call vote Melissa hi Janine hi Ted hi Ed hi Matt hi Jim hi and d and I okay and we have the uh permanent immovable barrier um designs that Kim has come up with uh thank you for doing all the work on this Kim I think there's I think there's two that we have to look at cam correct yep um so these are just the two prototypes that I came up with um the final one won't have this Voss sign stuff on it I was like that's an absolute no from us um but um we have hooping to no disturb Zone these are the little um circular medallions um that we will be able to give out um when we require applicants to install them um the land use department has carried this in the budget for fiscal year 24 so um I do need to get this moving to make sure that we get all the um everything in order so um yeah we've got Hopkinson no disturbance Zone Conservation Commission and then this one has a phone number uh we can change the background color we can change the font color we can change uh the text but um my request tonight is that if we have additional requests I am working with a designer um so I'd like to only have them do maybe one or two more iterations if we go over that we're going to end up spending more money on design than we are on signs um so just I know there's a lot of cooks in the kitchen but looking for some type of seeing if we can get a consensus tonight what do we think Jeff just Jim yeah go ahead uh thanks Kim I like it uh I don't know we need a phone number can we make them bigger than the current medallions though larger possibly yes um the larger we go the more we run the risk of I guess having to have big trees or bigger wider items as well to have them a fix to just something what I'm only thinking like I don't know what's what's the current one three inches across three inch it's four I believe this is quoted for four let me pull it up is that what we're normally using is that what um is that what the the medallions now are that is what the medallions are that the commission provides um the ones that Brian gasset was giving out are of similar size but I can't say that they're exactly four for sure okay um I don't know if anybody else thinks they could be they should be larger or four inches is pretty good size Jim yeah okay this is pretty comparable to the trail marking signs we see I those are around four inches as well yeah okay no I mean I think the sign looks great I personally I think given the purpose of these signs having the phone numberers helpful so if there's a new landowner or someone that comes upon this sign there's something indicating they like okay I can get more information if I call this phone number I think that's one of the best ways we can get someone to reach out otherwise they see the sign they might not know what it is and just move on with doing whatever they were doing yeah good point Matt yeah I agree Matt as well through the chair I also like the phone number and me too everything else looks great to me all right so let's uh get a motion to approve the design that's up on the green now so Kim can move forward with getting these ordered before the end of the fiscal year I make a motion to approve that sign with the phone and I'll second it and we'll do the roll call Melissa I Janine I Ted I Ed hi Matt hi Jim all right and I'm and I all right easy peyim clearly I was more worried about that than I needed to be awesome all right I think that uh concludes the agenda for tonight Melissa awesome job on the uh Lake hearing appreciate it and uh glad to see that pass we'll see how it goes with the select board uh but if there's a motion to adjourn the meeting for tonight through the chair this is Ed yes Ed before I make that motion I wish to compliment our major Domo Kim who managed to pull out of the woodwork a computer that's actually working although for whatever reason I had to do some gymnastics to get into the meeting with it but if you'll remember I've had trouble in the last two meetings so she got me a brandy spiffy new computer out of it that was Kim and Anna an needs cred there too okay but yes thank you Kim and Anna thank you all right so and you're making a motion to make a motion to adjourn and a second second back and we'll do the roll call Melissa I Janine I Ted I Ed I Matt hi Jim hi and I'm and I right and uh Kim and Ann I apologize for the technical difficulties I'm not quite sure what happened there but I'm glad that uh we were able to reconnect and there were no major issues so yeah I don't think it was you but I think everything's good I kept thinking it was just me it was happening to everybody it was weird yeah yeah yeah yeah I don't anyways okay well have a good evening everyone thank you good night