A resident from 11 Mary Drive raised concerns about the proposed solar photovoltaic development on Middle Road. The resident’s letter, read aloud during the meeting, expressed deep shock and worry about the impact on the landscape and wildlife they cherished. They emphasized the importance of adhering to the town’s solar bylaw, which prohibits large-scale solar installations within specific setbacks. The resident urged the planning board to enforce these regulations to protect adjacent properties. The commission acknowledged that while the solar farm issue was outside their direct jurisdiction, they hoped the planning board would address the concerns adequately. The commission reiterated its stance on solar farms and recognized the limitations of its authority regarding bylaw enforcement.

The commission then turned its attention to the ongoing public hearing concerning Lake Street and Efford Reservoir Lakes. The focus was on invasive weed removal efforts at these locations, spearheaded by Town Administrator James Kelley. The project, represented by the Lake Street Improvement Committee, involves using an Eco Harvester to manage invasive species. The committee member provided updates on the project’s progress and outlined special conditions in a draft order. These conditions included compliance with general performance standards, prohibitions on work during specific seasons to protect spawning species, and operational details to be provided before work commencement. Monitoring and recording measures, along with erosion control measures, were also emphasized to protect adjacent waters. The commission members engaged in a discussion about the draft conditions.

The meeting also tackled a issue regarding a beaver habitat contributing to biomass accumulation in a small pond on Lake Street. Concerns were raised about whether the habitat might cause flooding problems. The debate intensified as members discussed the potential consequences of removing the habitat, with some fearing it might cause the beaver to relocate to less suitable areas. Jurisdictional boundaries regarding beaver management were clarified, with the Board of Health holding authority over beaver issues, while the Conservation Commission focused on wetlands and habitats. There was a suggestion to seek advice from a biologist and a proposed timeline to contact one for a site visit in April or May. Members agreed on the need for proactive measures to prevent future complications related to the growing biomass.

The commission also heard from Chance Burs, the new conservation agent, who provided insights into the commission’s draft of special conditions for various projects. Burs praised the thoroughness of the conditions, highlighting them as essential for enforcement. He recommended including specific conditions that he deemed particularly effective. The discussion included suggestions for a two to three-week notice period for notifications related to public meetings, aimed at ensuring adequate preparation time for all parties. Burs emphasized the importance of public education in maintaining environmental standards and encouraged resident involvement in environmental projects.

In other business, the commission addressed a notice of intent filed by WHS Farm Incorporated for a solar array project on Middle Road. The applicant’s representative outlined the proposal involving construction within a 100-foot buffer zone to a bordering vegetated wetland. The commission discussed the project’s environmental implications and voted to continue the public hearing. Similarly, a notice of intent for a single-family home on Map Poisa Road was reviewed, with the applicant’s representative presenting a revised project plan. The commission deliberated on the project’s details, including stormwater management, and unanimously agreed to continue the public hearing for further evaluation.

The meeting also touched on a project involving the reconstruction of a garage following a fire. The commission discussed concerns about potential misunderstandings regarding the project, emphasizing the importance of proper delineation and addressing variances due to the project’s proximity to wetlands. A neighboring resident expressed no opposition to the garage reconstruction but raised concerns about water drainage issues, providing photographic evidence of flooding in their yard. The commission considered imposing conditions on the garage project, such as installing siltation barriers and managing runoff effectively.