Littleton Commission Tackles Unpermitted Environmental Violations

The Littleton Conservation Commission recently addressed multiple instances of unpermitted construction and land management, with a particular focus on enforcement orders for properties on Ivy and Warren Street. These discussions dominated the meeting due to the ongoing environmental concerns and the need for compliance and remediation.

The property on Ivy was under scrutiny for unauthorized dewatering within a buffer zone. Alec Drers, the engineer associated with the project, reported that activities were halted, pending an inspection from the Department of Public Works. The commission urged prompt follow-up with the DPW to facilitate progress by their next meeting.

In a more complex case, the commission discussed the continued unpermitted construction of a walkway on Warren Street, despite a prior order to stop work. The commission reviewed photographs and noted the work’s impact. There was a call for additional information and involvement from a wetland scientist and engineer to ensure proper remediation. Further, the commission emphasized the importance of adherence to enforcement orders.

The discussion expanded to the contractor’s understanding of the wetland regulations and the necessity of a work permit. The property owner described pre-existing conditions, including trash and water drainage issues. The commission debated whether knowledge of the exact wetland line was essential and considered a waiver for the walkway work. They stressed the need for plans from an engineer before proceeding and ratified the enforcement order.

Additionally, the commission discussed a project involving restoration work and the determination of a resource line’s exact location. They considered whether defining the line was necessary or whether efforts should focus on restoration. There was agreement that a replanting plan, consistent with soil types and existing vegetation, would be beneficial. Concerning a retaining wall and septic system within a jurisdictional area, there was debate over their necessity from a safety perspective versus their relevance to the Board of Health.

The commission also reviewed a proposal for a construction project on Spectacle Hill Road. The project, located on a former gravel pit site, included a building, a paved driveway, a septic system, and a well. The commission requested changes to boundary delineations and expressed the need for a peer review, particularly regarding stormwater management and the placement of boulders to prevent plowing from an adjacent property.

A public hearing on the redevelopment of a degraded Riverfront area featured a discussion of the project’s impact. The total Riverfront area identified was 105,000 square feet, with approximately 72,000 square feet labeled as degraded. The commission sought to confirm that the redevelopment would not affect any area that wasn’t already in such a state. A peer review was initiated, and a continuance to the next meeting was agreed upon.

Another public hearing addressed the replacement of a failed septic system and pavement removal on Porter Road. The commission was satisfied with the project, which involved no expansion of structures, and voted unanimously to close the hearing and issue an order of conditions.

The commission also tackled the installation of a seasonal dock at Park W, engaging with authorities regarding the impact on the lake and the status of a Harbor Master. After a thorough discussion, a motion was passed to issue an order of conditions for the dock installation.

The maintenance of a porous paper trail and extensions across a beach also came under discussion. Following updates on the erosion control plan, the commission closed the hearing and issued an order of conditions.

Further discussions included the approval of a waiver for a beach path at Long Lake, the intent for a gravel ADA trail at Cloverdale, minor modifications at Browns Woods, and work on Taylor Street. Updates on Webster CPC and Oak Hill stabilization were presented, including the approval of funds for land acquisition support.

Note: This meeting summary was generated by AI, which can occasionally misspell names, misattribute actions, and state inaccuracies. This summary is intended to be a starting point and you should review the meeting record linked above before acting on anything you read. If we got something wrong, let us know. We’re working every day to improve our process in pursuit of universal local government transparency.

Receive debriefs about local meetings in your inbox weekly: