The meeting began with the review and acceptance of minutes from June and quickly moved to accept the resignation of associate member Leonard Hull, Jr., effective August 8, 2024. A motion was then made and passed unanimously to request the Board of Selectmen to appoint Abel Mariano as a full member of the commission. Mariano was advised to gather information in preparation for his new role.

One of the most discussions centered on a proposed project by Dean Smith of New Leaf Energy on Main Lane. Smith’s arrival was delayed due to traffic, prompting the commission to table the discussion until his arrival. Meanwhile, an abbreviated notice of resource area delineation from Car Rebello of Bells Farm State was introduced, seeking confirmation of wetland resources on Milk Street. The commission noted that a site visit was conducted and that peer review services by Weston and Samson were underway but incomplete, resulting in a motion to continue the discussion to the next meeting on September 19th.

Another major topic was a notice of intent from H. Ahmed Haes of Grasshopper Energy, which was continued to an uncertain date. The commission also addressed an abbreviated notice of resource area delineation from David E. Butler on William Street. The peer review report was issued on August 22, and further responses were awaited from the applicant. A motion was made to allow the acceptance of an updated scope of proposal on behalf of the commission if it arrived before the next meeting.

In addition, the commission discussed a notice of intent from Lee Cetti of LBH Hunters Hill LLC for a community center within jurisdictional wetland resources. The need for peer review was noted, and a proposal from Weston and Samson was received. A continuance was requested by Evan Watson for this item, which the commission agreed to.

During the meeting, there was a discussion about a culvert installation related to a man-made ditch excavated by Mr. Noet in 2004 or 2005. Concerns were raised regarding the classification of this ditch, with some asserting that it does not qualify as a jurisdictional resource area. Erosion control measures were discussed to prevent sediment from entering adjacent wetlands. There was also mention of sump pumps contributing to water staining, clarifying the source of water observed during site visits.

The commission also reviewed a Notice of Intent filed by Alex Robeiro for work at Zero Tiger Lily Road. The proposed construction involved a single-family dwelling and associated infrastructure, including a driveway and a boulder slope intended to stabilize groundwater. Concerns were expressed about the distance of the construction from wetland areas, particularly regarding the septic system and the well, which were said to be located outside the 100-foot buffer zone.

The commission addressed various administrative matters, including the approval of a new laptop for the conservation office, the payment of bills, and updates on enforcement orders. A notable enforcement order from 2021 concerning a site on County Street was mentioned.

Discussions also included regulatory bylaw changes, with members confirming they had read through the proposed changes. A typographical error was identified in the documents regarding filings. The group deliberated on whether to maintain a single fee structure for residential versus commercial applications, with suggestions to keep it simple for now.

Further edits to the proposed bylaws were discussed, including adjustments to the language regarding consultant fees. It was suggested that failure to pay the specified fees should also be applicable to authorized agents, not just the commission. Concerns were raised about the language surrounding the commission’s authority to take necessary actions, emphasizing the need for clarity in alignment with Massachusetts General Law.

A significant portion of the meeting was dedicated to discussing fees associated with permit applications. Members considered whether to charge a fee for a negative determination of applicability. There was agreement to maintain a single fee structure for notices of intent, with discussions on including charges for additional site inspections. It was proposed that the fee for after-the-fact filings be set at $500 due to the multiple site visits often required to address non-compliance. An additional fee of $50 for extra inspections was deemed reasonable to cover the time spent by the commission’s members.