The fines in question were imposed for violations that occurred 30 days after the project’s completion. The debate centered on the timing and appropriateness of the fines, particularly in light of potential emergency situations that could be impacted by such punitive measures. One example cited was an elderly woman’s plight involving compromised pipes, highlighting the need for the commission to consider the ramifications of enforcement actions on emergency scenarios. Despite the differing opinions, the commission resolved to continue the topic at a later date once more information was available from the DEP.

Another point of discussion was a request for determination of applicability (RDA) for land clearing and vegetation removal on Wester Road. The review of the site plan and images, including debris and straw waddles installed by the property owner, was a continuation of a previously discussed matter. The commission reiterated the importance of stabilizing disturbed areas near wetlands and agreed on a motion to issue a negative 3 determination for the property. This decision came with the special condition that the area must be stabilized before any straw waddles are removed.

The commission also engaged in an in-depth conversation regarding a project for the replacement of a driveway culvert within a resource area, prompted by significant rainfall damage. There were concerns about the timing of the project and the notice of intent’s submission, which reportedly occurred two weeks after the initial receipt. Discussions also broached the topic of fines for non-compliance, with indications that fines would cease once the notice of intent was submitted. The status of the application and processing delays were further scrutinized, with the legal notice for the project being referenced and questions raised about the submission process’s dates and necessary documentation.

A property on Worster Road where the owner had cleaned up trash with the intention to create a pollinator area with wildflowers was another topic of interest. The commission was wary of the potential for filling in low areas near wetlands and underscored the need for area stabilization before the removal of straw waddles. After deliberation, the commission passed a motion to issue a negative 3 determination with the stipulation of stabilizing the disturbed area beforehand.

Additionally, the commission reviewed minor amendments to a site plan for a property on SAA Road, which involved clearing to provide access for a well contractor. Unitil’s selective foliage treatment along power lines was another environmental concern raised, especially regarding herbicide use. A member of the public, a new beekeeper, voiced worries about the impact on bees, prompting the commission to agree on reviewing the documentation provided by Unitil for further discussion.

The impact of environmental regulations on the local community was addressed when a citizen raised issues about private well updates and the effect of spraying on beekeepers. The tightening of EPA regulations on PFAS and its potential impact on Townsend’s water was also a concern. The commission discussed outreach strategies to Unitil for more information on chemicals used and considered establishing a registration system for well owners and beekeepers. Plans to use various communication platforms to inform the public were discussed.

Other meeting items included transportation for veterans to medical appointments, approval of a plan for a property on Bemis Road, and future educational opportunities. The meeting concluded with a motion to adjourn and the announcement of the next meeting date set for April 24th, 2024, at 7 PM.