A major focus of the meeting was the continuation of the hearing for a property on West Street. Presented by Kevin Qu from Boston Civil, the project includes raising part of a single-family dwelling, removing structures, and constructing new elements such as a deck and a driveway within the buffer zone of a bordering vegetated wetland. The Commission had conducted a site walk prior to the meeting, which revealed accurate wetland lines despite some areas being mossy and squishy. Walter Talbot reported that auger borings found no signs of wetland soil.

Discussions centered on tree trimming or removal, with one hazardous double leader tree identified for removal and another only for trimming. There was debate about a proposed 25-foot no-mow zone, which would considerably reduce the usable yard space. The consultant suggested a five-foot restoration area to slow down overland flow without significant yard loss.

Concerns also arose regarding erosion in the northwest corner of the property due to a break in the curbing, causing water runoff towards the river. Observations included invasive species like buckthorn, prompting recommendations for removal and replacement with native plants.

The discussions also covered the sewer pipe on the property, which appeared to lead to the street and raised questions about its potential to freeze during winter, necessitating coordination with the Department of Public Works (DPW) for mitigation. The removal of a shed extending beyond the property line was confirmed in the plans, and an invasive burning bush was likely to be removed.

The Commission emphasized the importance of addressing invasive species and maintaining wetland integrity with proper restoration efforts. Thorough documentation and monitoring during and after construction were deemed essential to avoid future erosion and invasive plant issues.

Another topic was the erosion control measures for a project near a riverfront area. The proposed erosion control involved silt fencing with waddles, and there was a suggestion to use mulch socks over straw waddles. Questions about the driveway slope and the addition of a crushed stone strip were clarified, with the intention to create an accessible path with a slope under 5% to reduce water velocity off the asphalt.

Discussions also covered the implications of the project on the riverfront area, with concerns that the project might exceed the 10% degradation limit, necessitating mitigation measures. Protective measures around the storm drain to capture sediment from the project were suggested, including the use of silt sacks.

The Commission also discussed the proposed modifications to a residential property, specifically the footprint of an existing patio and the implications of these changes on the surrounding wetland area. The proposed rebuild would bring the new construction closer to the wetland area while wrapping around the house. Regulations stipulate that new constructions cannot extend closer to the wetland than existing structures, and a drainage pipe underneath the existing patio required compliance with mitigation efforts as close to riverfront areas as possible.

The meeting also addressed violations and other business matters. A situation involving the property on Street was discussed, where the house would be moved 10 feet forward towards Forest Street, increasing the separation distance from wetlands and a vernal pool. This adjustment required relocating all impervious surfaces closer to Forest Street, and the plan reflecting these changes was under review.

Concerns were raised about construction activities that occurred without prior consent, specifically regarding the foundation built without approval. The owner acknowledged the oversight and assured increased attention to the site during ongoing construction. Measures to manage concrete washout areas were discussed, including the placement of hay bales to mitigate runoff and constructing a stone checkpoint.

The meeting also touched on the management of a construction site near wetlands, focusing on mitigating erosion and managing water flow. The condition of the site, particularly where concrete had been processed, was noted, with remnants presenting a risk of further leeching. Practical plans to create barriers to prevent water from cascading towards the wetlands were proposed, including the use of hay bales and silt fences to minimize erosion.

Finally, the Commission discussed the enforcement of a new no-dog policy in local open spaces. Concerns were raised about the potential for continued vandalism of temporary signs and public reactions to the policy. The rationale behind the policy included studies showing that dog urine could deter wildlife, impacting their habitats. The Commission decided to issue warnings for first-time offenses and tickets for repeat violations. The need for enforcement once permanent signs are posted was acknowledged, and the topic was slated for future discussion.