##VIDEO ID:e1RZkTmoy4w## yeah I think all I've heard is um we're going to be missing Ed tonight but otherwise I think we're expecting everyone oh you're on mute Jim yeah it's not gonna be here he just got back from Montas yeah through the chair you're live on hcam TV thank you Mr Hamilton all right being that it's 7:00 I'm going to go ahead and start the recording recording in progress and um welcome everybody to the meeting tonight thanks for coming on uh know it's a holiday week but I think being on the meeting here is better than sitting in traffic in the rain so what anyone who's not here is probably doing um all right I'll start with the uh remote meeting script um this is the November 26 2024 open meeting of the hopkington Conservation Commission being conducted remotely consistent with an act extending certain covid-19 measures adopted during the State of Emergency the new law authorizes all members of a public body to continue participating in meetings remotely the open meeting laws requirement that a quorum of the body and the chair be physically present at the meeting location remains suspended for this meeting the hopkington Conservation Commission is Con meeting by video conference via Zoom app as posted on the town's web meeting calendar and the Conservation Commission agenda identifying how the public may join Additionally the meeting may also be broadcast by hcam through one or more one or many of its channels or platforms please note that this meeting is being recorded and that some attendees are participating by video conference accordingly Please be aware that others may be able to see you and take care not to screen share your computer anything that you broadcast may be captured by the recording supporting materials that have been provided to the members of the commission for this meeting are available on the town's website this meeting will feature public comment after commission members and staff have discussed each project application on the agenda chair will open the discussion to public comment members of the public who wish to speak are asked to identify their name and address 3 minutes will be afforded for each public comment each vote taken in the meeting will be conducted via roll call of the members so I will now confirm which commission members are present um Jim yeah Ted I did not see Ted come in yet Ed is absent tonight Janine present Heather present Matt present and I myself Melissa Ros am present and I will now confirm staff that are present Judy present Anna present and Joe present all right awesome um I guess to get started we had a couple or at least one last minute scratch to the agenda um so just point that out to any anyone on the call that 12 Maple Street extension um will not be heard tonight at applicant requested a continuation to December 17th also hopkington stoden Garden at 28 Lumber Street um will not be heard it is being continued at the request of the applicant to December 17th all right so with that being said um we'll start with documents for review under the work session items so um Judy or Anna we have a certif certificate of compliance for 178 Ash Street sure through the chair um so the three documents for review and your signatures tonight are um the three documents that we closed at our last meeting so 178 Ash Street certificate of compliance for new single family house the um hopkington dpw's Granite Street right of way um that's the negative determination for the geotechnical borings and then peard 34 Downey Street was a certificate of compliance for the boat lift so um the documents have all been prepared by Judy and they're ready for signatures by Anna tonight if the commission so chooses okay um yep I'm I think I'm on or I am on board with that I think that's what we talked about at the last meeting um did we vote at the last meeting for Signature by you Anna or we need to do that we did not that's why they are listed that's why they're there yeah okay yes please and as a friendly reminder um anything we may close tonight if we could please request signature pages okay thank you all right Melissa Melissa I'll make a motion for that I'll make a motion at Anna buy m or us okay is that what you're looking for close and sign yep close the hearing and sign um all right can I get a second second and um all right so I'm going to do the roll call here Jim all right p is still okay Janine I Heather I Matt I and I am an I so that one's all set can I get a motion to close um the negative on the negative determination of applicability for DPW and signatures by Anna and you just need a motion so moved in a second back I was on you all right uh roll call Jim I Janine I Heather I Matt hi and I'm also an i and then lastly can I get a motion for 34 Downey Street um certificate of compliance and signatures by Anna move a second second all right um all in favor Jim Janine hi I Heather I Matt I and I am also an i all right so all set there um draft minutes for review from September 10th um did every anyone have any comments or not have enough time to review these this was a carryover from the last meeting all right hearing no comments um can I get a motion to approve the minutes from September 10th and a second second all in favor Jim I Janine I Heather hi Matt hi and I'm also an i those are all set all right next up we'll go to hopkington DPW 238 Wood Street exemption request for a tree Anna do you or Judy want to go through this one so the chair I'm happy to present this one um Carrie Reed DPW director reached out to Judy and myself regarding um four Hazard trees on the Woodville fire station um property at 238 Wood Street uh three of the trees along the driveway are were very clearly dead and leaning over the driveway so Judy and I administratively um will be approving those three trees the fourth tree that um requested is in the center of um the property uh quite close to the existing fire station building they are about to replace the roof and the tree has been dropping branches it is definitely not dead but it is declining um there's definitely some rot on it some missing bark and the um fire department through the DPW is requesting that that be deemed a hazardous tree so the reason we are coming to the commission for this is um it is Riverfront to whiteall Brook so it is jurisdictional so we are requesting that the commission um deem this tree A Hazard and allow the removal of this tree okay um I just had car saw Carrie hop on the call um Carrie did you want to say anything on this one or add anything to what Anna had just described if you caught it um no I think I one to I think Anna covered it all so I'm just here in case anybody has any questions just to hear any of your feedback but okay yeah I think she covered it all okay um seems pretty straightforward to me um it's in obviously in lawn area um does anyone on the commission have any any questions about this one so would be we we look for replacement here I know it's usually I think what 3 to one when it's not a dead tree is it one to one when it's a Passages tree if I'm remembering correctly through the chair yes Anna so typically we do a two to one replacement um the fire department has indicated they are more than happy to do some native Replacements they do have hopefully in the next few years um an addition project they will be coming to the commission um to be putting an addition on this building and at that time they're hoping to include those replacement plantings as part of the new design um they don't want to put something in right away and then have to either move it or have it in the way of either staging or additional work that they're doing so um the fire chief has indicated that he is willing to do some Natives and that was um car's recommendation and Judy and I's recommendation as well I think they're just asking for a little bit of of uh leniency on the time to include those additional native plantings okay thank you um any other questions or comments on this one from the board or from the public okay yeah I think I'm I'm fine with the just put a note in the the file I guess Anna um for when a new application comes in we'll just look for those plantings for the tree replacement I'm good with it um so this is an exemption request um correct the commission sometimes they vote sometimes they don't so it's it's your preference but if the commission is amendable to it um Judy and I will write up that letter and um Carrie will deal with the reme love the trees okay um I'm good with that just writing a letter thanks all right mov along um we have zero silven way um Cameron Woods exemption requests for a trail bridge um do we have anyone on the line for this yes uh this is David freed I live at 73 Winter Street hi welcome thank you thank you great to be here um do you want to give a description of what you're requesting here or okay I don't know you're able I sent in an application I don't know if uh if anyone is able to pull it up or possibly I could pull it out oh there it is right here yep okay so I guess I would just I just would first go to the map on the second page so I live on where that blue dot is uh at 73 winter and then behind me is Cam is uh Cameron Woods uh and you can see there's a section of the silven way subdivision between my house and the main portion of Cameron Woods uh there's there been a trail going through my yard connecting up to the Red Trail uh ever since I moved into this area it's at least 30 years old um it it goes through a kind of a a wetlands area where I show as the boardwalk location that's kind of a shrubby Wetlands type of area and the trail is has been going through there forever over the years the the ground has sunk down or the roots have popped up to the point where it's kind of difficult to walk through there or I do a lot of mountain biking uh I mountain bike through there yeah I have a couple pictures of that area you can see where kind of the roots of popped up above the grade so I'd like to uh put in a boardwalk through that area just a like a standard Boardwalk that you see tons of other places in the woods uh I got approve from the open space preservation Committee in their at their November meeting last year and kind of SL but the uh permit the approval was contingent upon um approval by the Conservation Commission and I've been a little slow getting in this application but uh here it is okay I'm happy to answer any questions so what I'm asking the the the commission is to approve uh me building a bridge on Town land um on that trail through that location okay um thank you for that that description and the pictures and the maps um Anna do you have anything Anna or Judy do you have anything to add uh to what Mr freed has described here based on your knowledge through the chair Judy I don't want to keep St talking over you so if you if you want to talk just absolutely step in um so Judy and I did walk the trail last Friday um and he's right like the roots are definitely raised up it is you know I tripped a few times just while trying to you know take some pictures and you know it this the footing is not great in that area um I used my handy dandy camera measuring tool um so it looked the area with the routs seem to be about 50 ft I believe Mr fr is requesting about 40t worth of boardwalks um the description that he is including seems pretty standard for other descriptions of foot bridges that the commission has approved in the past um it is a little unique that it's a homeowner requesting versus you know one of the land trusts that we typically work with or open space but I don't think it's unheard of and open space has agreed to allowing this to be installed so um I I would think that it is something that the commission would entertain and um but since it is through the wetlands That's Why Judy and I aren't doing the approval again um having the commission do the approval if they so choose okay sure um the only thing I would add is I believe David mentioned he's carrying the segments in not building on site but Cor I would build on site I mean I am not sure why it must have been a copy and paste eror from the template I use but you know my intention was to build it on site m i mean that's the only way to get it level okay actually not the only way but yeah no I was it's a lot easier yeah from your sketch it looked like it was like you said um similar to any of the um the bridges or foot bridges that we see um the scouts do and and whatnot throughout throughout Town um it does look like a very well-used path so um you know it's already cut obviously for you it doesn't look like you you anticipate cutting um much in the way of you know trees or brush or anything to put this in no I would maintain the existing Trail where it is yeah okay I mean that seems to be the best place to put it yep okay um seems Seems okay to me I don't know if anyone else on the commission has any comments or thoughts that they want to bring up for this I just have a question can't find the map but is this near the FIP property by any chance this near FIP over there that open space has been looking or property it's near it yes but the the fips property is if you see silven way the fips property is south of that or south of s way okay it's it's kind of that that pink thing I think might be it so it is even though it ends in your yard uh as it were there's nowhere out onto Winter Street there's no trail head at winter sheet is there does it go back onto open space property and then out to the uh the red trail goes out to Winter Street and you see that number two that is a a trail head right there yeah and then there's the one on silven way right where oh yeah right okay all right great thank you you're welcome um anyone from the audience have any questions comments on this scrolling through I don't see any um yeah I think I I think we're good on this one so this is another exemption request that we don't necessarily have to um vote on but it uh would be a letter written down in a letter by by Judy um basic based on a discussion tonight um and I think that's I think that's fine so um are you good with writing up a letter Judy yep I can do that mizing that okay yeah and we'll just outline the things obviously you you outlined your plan and um I would just note in there that you know you're maintaining the existing alignment of the trail and not taking down um you know not veering from that or taking down any additional trees or um shrubs so um thanks for coming in and um presenting to us um yes thank you thank you for your consideration great all right um being that at 7:20 I'm going to jump back up to continued hearings um to 60 North M request for determination of applicability continuation of the septic system um Anna or Jud you want to um update us on this one sure through the chair yep um so we all heard about this one at last meeting um the only thing we were waiting on was a planting plan for the area between the tree line and the pibs um since this was kind of just blank in the original plan um we did receive a planting plan that proposed nine native bushes in that area so three High Bush blueberry three inkberry and three spice bush um the commission recommended six so they've done us three better um and those are really all of the updates Anna and I took a look at it and everything seems okay so let us know if anyone has questions okay no that that sounds like what I remember that's great there and a couple um more yep all in that area yeah okay that looks good to me does anyone else on the commission have any questions comments is chair yes Joe um I haven't the looked over the new plan I just uh wanted I thought there was some conversation about um adjusting the pib line uh last time and I didn't know if that was um done on this plan or not good point Joe um so I do see the pib the barrier rocks along mol line I can't remember where it was before through the chair yes it didn't change so I'll just scroll up oh I don't have the original play on here but they were in the exact same place the only thing different on this revised plan is the plantings MH yeah this is Dan McIntyre representing the homeowner that's correct we didn't change the uh the well and marker locations at all we thought the locations originally proposed were good to be kind of right on the edge of the uh of the lawn and the woods moving them into the middle of the lawn didn't seem to serve any purpose other than them being removed in the future by the home owner I'm sure okay yeah I think looking at the plan now um I think it at least it makes sense to me the way I'm looking at it right now with the bushes and the Disturbed area there or the you know where there aren't any trees and then having the pib with the barrier rocks um described along that dotted line does anyone else have any from the commission have any recollection or um requests in regards to the pi line Looks like what we discussed last time yeah okay and maybe confusing this with a different project I'm sorry yeah it I think just looking at the plan the way it is now regardless I it makes sense to me I think so yeah through the chair um I believe where Joe you're probably thinking about there's another project we talked about at the last hearing that had similar barrier rocks yeah I think I'm looking at the plan right now I was mistaken on my comments okay no worries we looked at a lot of very similar projects last meeting felt like it was just repeat repeat so um okay that being said um can I get a motion uh to approve this plan I'll make a motion to approve the plan we see on our screen with signatures by Judy Orna can I get a second I'm happy to second that all right you got Ted awesome um I'll go down the Roll Call Jim I Ted I Janine I Heather I Matt I and I'm also an I so thank you you're all good to go thank you very much y all right next up we have 71 West Main Street request for determination of applicability continuation on the ramp um yes so is the applicant on the line for this filing yes you are okay good evening Hi how are you good good nice to see you again y thanks for thanks for coming back you want to uh give us an update on what you might have un covered or found or decided since we last talked uh well the the um the plan that you see on the screen let's see so we we've clarified the removal of the shed which was a talking point last time um it's it's in disrepair we want to just you know carefully remove it without any machinery and just you know place it in um place it place it in a dumpster and get it off the site and we could um we could plant the area with Native plantings or we could do you know put grass or whatever whatever the commission desires um and then we also have been working with a few different departments on um on trash removal or you know trash and recycling once the bakery is up and running so um what we'd like to propose is rather than a a dumpster the the business doesn't generate a lot of waste really it's um it can be handled with two small rollway bins that we'd like to put in an area that we that we want to build right behind the driveway you see the cursor going over there um to the um kind of south of the garage about 10 feet from the building off the parking area because we're going to need that the owner is going to park right next to the garage right where it says asphalt pavement there that's where his truck's going to be and so you know it'll be screened from view you know far back from the road and also convenient you know so it'll be it'll be it'll be easy to use and um I think as far away as possible from the the the streaming question which I think we'll be talking about shortly um which is to the east of the site those are the only updates we've made and then we've also requested a um jurisdictional U I guess decision or or whatever I forget what it's called I apologize um regarding this the stream itself thank you okay thank you for that update um so Joe were you looking at the jurisdiction of the the stream in more deta detail is that uh yes I did um okay and I did s the revised memo today I don't know if I had a chance to look at it um I I did read it I I can't um I could honestly say that I didn't follow everything that you wrote yeah it's it's hard to keep track of it's um I guess I can um I don't know how much the commission wants me to give in detail but um there have been uh there are pre two previous overs that were issued um in close proximity to this site um that uh one was in I think the first one was [Music] 201 13 um and the second one was 2016 um the 2013 one uh was for uh the paral immediately to the east of the uh site that today and also the properties to the South where the U Constitution court and Independence Place um they're eventually located um that oad uh approved a BBW line and also uh approved a stream as intermittent uh in this area now the Stream that was approved as intermittent uh is the stream that flows from the south North toward the site um but as it was approved on those plans the stream when it's about 500 feet south of the current site it makes a turn to the Northeast and roughly parallel is West Main Street there is no finding on the streen that is located directly east of the site uh in any of the uh filings there were there were three filings that the commission had had sent to me to take a look at um so there was uh a determination of inter intermittent streams uh in 2013 and that stream is flows is shown on the plans about 500 feet south of the site there's no stream shown uh east of the site which is uh the one that we're looking at now um and 2016 uh the oad approved the BBW delineation but really made no mention of the stream um there were minutes uh in that uh file indicating that uh I think there were drought conditions so uh observations of of dry conditions were not uh valid um the applicant's consultant had U uh said that he was familiar with the Stream and that it drives regularly and uh the uh commissions uh Peru consultant also had mentioned that he had observed that stream dry uh during non- drought conditions um so they they've issued the overhead without any any any uh comment on that scen um with no student stats um and um between the two of those oad filings it's there was no stream stats done on the stream as it curves south of the site um and there was no indication as far as how the plans um how the stream was uh placed on those plans because there were there was no delineation there were no Bank Flags um so it was unclear if it was survey located and placed on those plans or if it was based on aerial imagery or or how it was placed so that's that's that's one issue there's um the stream diverges depending on on what plan or what what map you're looking at um if you do a current stream stats analysis uh the stream stats program considers the stream that runs east of the site as the as the primary Channel um and does not continue the water shed much much further to the east however based on the approved oads the primary stream is not the stream that runs east of the site but curves curves to the Northeast know south of the site so that's that's one issue the other issue is that um the stream stats Watershed um analysis for this stream we're talking about this stream directly east of the site um is apparently in error um and this is was brought to light and a project that was done drainage project that was done for mpac Lake um where there were some large uh 48 in covers that were replaced and a stream stats analysis was Run for the stream flowing roughly from the area of uh I 495 uh West to uh M benite Lake and it showed that screen is intermittent uh during the course of the review the project Engineers looked at U drainage plans that were prepared for uh I 495 and for sou Street and determined that 49 5 really changed the Watershed in that area and that the Watershed now extends um much further east than what would be indicated by a stream stat analysis to the point where it made the stream going to basate Perennial um and red it reduces The Watershed that stream stats includes for the current stream that we're looking at um I know it's getting probably very confusing um so regarding the stream we're looking at today that is located east of the project site um one one of the ways I looked at it was to uh use the current stream stats analysis which includes the portion of a watershed that was determined to actually flow to aspan Lake um and then I did a separate stream stats analysis for that the portion of the Watershed approximate portion of the wed that flows toward mpano Lake and subtracted that from the total that stream stats gives for um the stream that's located east of the site um and if you do that it comes out a little bit under u a half of a square mile comes up to 0.43 square mil which is um too small to be considered um perennial um but that said there's really nothing definitive at this time based on my review um because of the issues with the stream stats Watershed um analysis being off and the uh difference in the location of the primary stream channel um on the previously approved oide plans and and what stream stats is considering the the primary stream channel so in the end I think we're recommending uh the applicant uh and if the commission so requires would to get a definitive um determination would be to have to run a Watershed analysis to see the actual size of that Watershed and which stream is actually carrying the flow um at a location South of the uh the current site okay well confusing I know I get it yeah um no get it I see a lot of things pointing to um the Commission in the past and based on just the analysis that you did for this to be really I don't know leaning towards an intermittent stream um I would not disagree with that I just I don't know that it's for for for what we're looking at the site right now what the project is um I don't know that it makes sense for the applicant to go through um a lot more effort to try and determine um to prove to prove this stream when we do have a lot of data here um from previous projects and what we've assumed to date that it's been intermittent up until this point cuz we um of all the information you know that you're you're pointing out here in the report um and this comes down to really whether or not we are looking for a notice of intent or um would entertain this as an RDA um in the end I think is what we established at the last meeting um is what it what it comes down to um I don't know if anyone else on the commission has thoughts but I'm I'm leaning toward um just based on the history of the information provided being consistent with what it's been classified to up until this point as an intermittent stream but I'd be open to um other opinions from from others on the board makes sense to me makes sense to Jim what was that Heather it was me I said I would agree with you with with your assessment Melissa okay makes sense you have any thoughts Matt yeah I'm I'm I'm with you on this one if we got some historical information that indicates this is an intermittent stream and some of the current data is a little bit unclear as to whether not it would qualify as perennial I think we've got good basis to move forward with it as an intermittent stream and make a decision RDA versus noi given that information okay all right I think that um I think we're all on the same page there so um we'll go we'll go with that and we'll look at this as an intermittent stream so we we're not dealing with a Riverfront area here um so we can entertain this as an RD a so that being said you can go back to um what's proposed here with the walkway um the ramp on the he helical piles the shed being removed we had talked about that in the last meeting as being um some mitigation for the proposed walkway um that's in that 50ft and 100t buffer um and now we have an additional space here we're looking at presented tonight which is The Hardscape pad is that concrete when you say Hardscape a concrete pad no I think it it's a it's a very light so we want to we want to get two large plastic bins and then a then a plastic enclosure to cover the bins to keep you know animals out and that sort of thing so it it's it's a light structure we we'd like to just use um pavers similar to the walkway that we're proposing okay we were not looking to pour concrete or or or do any you know a more impactful Hardscape just pavers okay and the reason for the space like the length that comes off in front of the um trash receptor Les you're saying that's where they're planning on parking a truck uh right or the there right there yes direct right next to the garage planting on planning on parking a truck I do have a parking plan that I didn't unfortunately I didn't send to Anna today um but basically there's a garage right above where it says buffer zone that's a garage we're going to use that for parking for employees and then directly next to the the garage is parking for employees and then so if we if we put the I mean I understand I understand the concern it would be better if it were closer to the driveway right and we wouldn't be right yeah I'm asking yeah exactly why is it so far away it's it's just to give some breathing room from the building because you know it's going to be a trash there could be food in it you know we just in case it attracts things we just want to keep it some distance away from the building and then also just for ease of access if there is a vehicle parked there um it would just be easier to work around it if it were not directly next to the building but I understand the concern that's why it's proposed there though okay and that is all grass area where you're proposing that correct pad it's all grass now yes right up to the property line and I think slightly Beyond it but then it's you know there's some um weeds and other things just pass the proper line there but there's all grass right around it now okay do we know um do we know the square footage of the shed area being removed versus these two new um I can tell you that right now new areas paper I can tell you that right now just give me about uh one minute here so the shed itself shed is 167 square feet the area that I'm talking about now the ccape area that I just described is 96 Square ft so 167 for the shed 96 square feet for what what for the trash area and and do would you like an area calculation for the rest of the proposed uh yeah I was yep I'm curious what the other walkway area is the walkway it stealth is 80 that's 96 over by the trash 80 for that for um you know the walkway to the east of the building and then the the ramp and the landing yes yeah okay yeah no problem so the ramp and the landing are 165 okay do would you um would you like me to add all those up oh I get it okay 341 through the CH 341 yep okay okay 341 proposed 167 removed right yep okay all right those are all my questions do anyone else on the uh commission have I'm sorry one other thing we could slide the uh we could slide the trash bins closer to the driveway if if it's um if You' prefer okay Alissa yes I I'm happy for that last comment from the applicant um I don't want to be a stickler and I'm excited to have a bakery and have this this commercial spot reopened I don't like setting the precedent of allowing that shed within the 50-ft buffer when I didn't hear a really extraordinarily good reason why it needs to be there so and given I love that the shed is being removed um but given that only a little bit of it maybe a third is within the 50 Foot buffer we're adding much more to the buffer if we allow the trash receptacle area there so I feel a little guil being a stickler but not guilty enough to keep my mouth closed yep through the chair yes I have the same thoughts as Ted so for me I could not vote Yes on that okay anyone else have any thoughts comments the commission or the audience I'll take it one further I guess y for this to be an for this to be an RDA in my opinion the trash receptacles would need to be located outside the 50 Foot buffer zone okay otherwise I'd be looking notice of intent personally we can we can do I think I agree with that mat thanks I wonder if it could go over on the other side of the building next to the walkway it can so directly next to the walk walkway right yeah directly east of it up tight to the Cape Cod [Music] burm is that um or close to it anyway so so it it does drop off slightly actually not slightly it drops off you can see a couple feet down to where the shed area is so we would need to do some filling in uh to create a flat area but obviously it wouldn't be a large area that we would need to be creating so yeah I think that um you know the thing about the trash receptacles is it just you know the closer it is to the Wetland the the easier things are to migrate out and into the Wetland you know from there so um that would be that would be appreciated getting it out of that 50 foot um okay so if you could take a look update the plan to move the um move the trash receptacles out of the 50 and then um I think as far as you probably we should give you some thoughts I guess on what we want the area to look like once the sheds removed um yes please yep um I mean I think I I would be okay with seating um it's all grass in that area that surrounds it right right I don't know I I guess I would look for any uh comments from the commission on that too anybody have yep I don't think it was grass I think it was kind of hidden behind some Shrubbery or or overgrown bushes of some kind I I think it lends itself more to Shrub planting if my memory is correct what's surrounds it oh my memory is not that's the show there I mean there are shrubs around it it does I thought it was kind of hidden behind shrubs I may be thinking of a different shed in a different from a different angle it is maybe that's what it was I I I would prefer plantings to align with the plantings that are there okay yeah no that that gives a good picture I was thinking it was just in the middle of a lawn um so if you could maybe work with Judy and um Anna that we have some guidelines in our bylaw about planting um you know how many plants should be spaced um in a given area um so if you don't mind um just updating the plan um to indicate indicate that they also have planting lists of native species um that you can pick off of as far as what you might want that sounds great and as you can see in this photo the trash bins would be pretty much much directly behind that white line that you see there okay so and then our n our our new plantings would be basically a continuation of that um shrub or whatever that whatever that planting is right yeah is yep yeah no I think that's a good idea we um prevent cutting grass grass crowing cutting so yep go ahead Matt one one good I I agree entirely with the shrubs I think that's a great idea uh it from what I recall to the left of the shed there is some knotweed It's relatively small patch of it along the Wetland Edge there or within the buffer um it may make sense to incorporate some invasive species management because it doesn't seem like it's out of control it seems like it's a small pocket so we could do something now to mitigate that from continuing to spread I think there's some value there especially if the sheds being removed there's going to be some exposed soil potentially you know it's a good opportunity to try to nip it in the bud through the chair yes Santa Judy could you move that picture so we can see the plan again I believe the shed is pretty much on the property line mat so I don't know if that not weed is off property I I think it's on proper property so if you go you can see at the top right of the plan you can see the sign where it says RDA you can see like a small portion of the rectangle there the the not weed is just page south of that to the right so it's closer to the roadway okay yeah it's closer to the roadway yeah thank you for that clarification man yeah okay so Mr Gallon I think that um our staff and Judy could probably give you some guidance as well U maybe Joe on what that would look like for invasive species management strategies okay um just as a site owner because yeah like that stuff can really take over um yeah take over all of your you know Green area it's not pretty um so maybe you can get ahead of it yeah the chair is is it fair to say to give Mr Gallant some good direction leaving here if he comes back to us with a plan that shows the trash receptacles outside the 50 Foot the shed removed with some shrubs replacing it and a invasive species management plan for that not weed we'd be satisfied to make a decision and move forward I would I would be all set yep and our next meeting is December 17th um so we could entertain it at that meeting if you can get it together for in the next couple weeks that would be great would that work okay thank you yes so can um I get a a motion to continue this to December 17th so moved can I get a second second and um we'll do the roll call Jim hi Ted I Janine I Heather I and I am also an i as am I sorry Matt and Matt all good all right so we'll see you in a couple weeks Mr Allen see see you then thank you yep all right next up we have 150 Fruit Street notice of intent continuation site work for a single family home um um so last we spoke this came in with an updated plan right before our last meeting so we um asked Lucas and stff to take time to review it um I know we got a some some comments back from Lucas Joe I think those came in yesterday um yesterday today can you just uh go over the couple things that you caught when you were looking at the plan for the commission um no no major um issues uh the uh initial um review had noted that the watland a flags were not continued to the property line um and the revised plan continues uh the a series uh on the North End of the um wentland to the property line but didn't continue it on the south end and frankly the the South End doesn't really impact the buffer zone on the where the proposed work is so I don't see it as a as a major issue um unless the commission wants to have the full line uh shown on on the plan so like I said some minor uh I still didn't not see a checklist as required under the bylaw in the revised materials and the site plan uh still did not have the vertical date and then the field survey date which is typically something that should be included on the plan and also have um just just wanted to again clarify that if the uh buffer zones are correctly shown I it's a small area um where it looks like the uh total buffer zones uh disturbance that was provided on the bylaw form um had an increase in buffer zone for ibw because we had two two additional iws but it had a decrease in the buffer zone for BBW um and it looked like there's actually with the change in the flaing of wetland a BBW a slightly larger buer Zone from Wetland a and it's not significant I estimate it's I mean 45 50 square feet that's um additional in the buff in the BB additional work in the BBW buffer zone um that is not noted on the bylaw form um so if the commission wants to the form updated and corrected or uh further explanation of of those buffer zones um and then just as a new comment um regarding the uh planting density um there's some depos plants in the two isolated weapons I think there's a a red maple in the smaller one and a red maple and a couple of high brush blueberry in the the other one um if the commission is looking to uh have those planted at the recommended um densities in their bylaw uh then it would require a couple of additional additional plants okay it sounds like there's a couple Loose Ends um Mitch I think I saw Mitch from Gard Consulting are you on the line do you want to um respond or talk about any of the comments sure um yes so uh thank you Joe for the comments um I think so sounds like the Aeries Wetland line connecting to the property boundary is is not a nonissue um since it it it won't impact the project uh the buffer zone calculation also um seems like a minor issue um um not really uh you know it won't really impact the commission's decision whether to approve the project or not um you know whether it be 40 or 50 uh more square feet of impact from the original plan and I think that calculation may have been um you know since the iws were added to the plan some of that buffer zone disturbance that was originally calculated as IV as bvw buffer zone disturbance they have been added into the ivw buffer zone disturbance so it it may all be accounted for uh but regardless I I don't think it it would impact the commission decision making on the project um and then the third item was the amount of plantings um so when we were with the commission a couple weeks ago um or it was a month ago now um we had discussed that we would do one red maple tree in the E Series and then two red maple trees in the D series but I ended up splitting it up into a a red maple and two hybrid blueberries just to add some more diversity but um so I think you know that it would be nice if we could just continue agreeing sort of with what we decided La at the two previous hearings ago um and not you know continuing to bolster up the plantings in there because the planting thems are already a major Improvement to those Wetlands so because right now they're just uh the eer is just long and then the D series is a pile of of wood um so uh so overall I think the the commission you know has um everything in their hands that they need to uh make the decision tonight so I think it'd be um ideal if the commission would be willing to vote to issue and Order conditions okay um thank you for your thoughts on that I would say that you know I agree the um the comments don't wouldn't change my decision on um you know the application and how i' would vote but I I mean I do appreciate clean paperwork for our files um so I think that uh we do we should clean up the square footage um on the forms and make sure they're representative of the plan that we're um approving um I'm fine with the the Wetland flag on the a series not connecting at the bottom um was there a checklist did you do a checklist or is that just is that just missing nope nope no checklist okay and then um my vagle from our discussions I think we we may have talked about the number of plants so I'm um I'm inclined to be okay with the numbers that you have on here just based on past meeting discussions um but I defer to any uh additional comments from the board if anybody has any thoughts um that they want to share so through the chair and and I apologize for this question I missed the first hearing so it it I may just end up needing to abstain but looking at the permanent movable barriers that they're creating a path through the 50ft buffer zone I'm just curious why we have the permanent movable barriers making a path through the 50 it looks confusing for a homeowner no I'm surprised we didn't just put them on the uh the um erosion control barrier line I know there's no backyard like with this property so I can see this in the future going to be creep because the homeowner is going to come in back and say can have a backyard um [Music] but it just confuses me that we have the permanent removal bavar is laid out that way yeah we did talk about this um in one of our meetings and kind of went back and forth on it and I think the thought was that this site has been um it has been worked a lot it's got these Meadow areas that have been existing for quite some time and that um is the one that goes through the tree line there um was kind of an asset to the property and like you said there's not much lawn so we entertained um putting the pibs along the existing tree line to maintain um the buffer where it is and allow them to you know have this Meadow kept Meadow area um that they could continue to use so we did we did talk about it um in one of our meetings okay thank you thank you for indulging me for um answering that when I missed the me so yeah uh Melissa I think I might be in the same place as Janine I I don't remember this hearing um and I'm looking at a slightly different plan that was sent to us and there's a there's plenty of work be it landscaping or building between the 100 and the 5050 foot um from the wetlands I'm just really uncomfortable with this whole thing but I don't remember meeting with it and I don't know if we have numbers for me to abstain on a vote as well I certainly wouldn't want to upturn the Apple card if we we had an extensive meeting on this with discussions that I missed I'm pretty sure unless I'm the only one that's remembering it but I'm pretty sure we talked about this and no not everyone has to agree and it can be voted on however you want want to vote on it whether you you know want to or not but I'm I don't know any I'm not saying we didn't meet I just don't know if I was I know I missed a meeting somewhere the chair because of yes both Ted and Janine were missing at the first hearing for this appliation so that makes me feel better at least that I don't have the memory thank you for that Anna and I'll make you feel better Melissa I do remember this conversation okay so it did happen Ed was here but he's not here today I know I remember Ed talking about it through the chair just to to remind everyone and for um Janine and Ted I have to uh recuse myself from comment or from this discussion because I live in very close proximity to this site right thanks Heather so my apologies then but at least I feel better that I wasn't here may I ask a question or two for clarification sure is is there any building on this site right now or is it just a mix of meadow and trees it is currently a mix of meadow trees and some soil stock pile areas and is this a neighborhood that's somehow grandfathered in with the 100 foot buffer uh Hopkinson bylaws sometimes we run into those where there's a kind of grandfathered in and then we're only holding to the 50 we only have jurisdiction to the 50 through the chair it is not a grandfathered law okay so I don't know if if my Comon is worthwhile at this point or not but I I am unhappy with how much of the garage and how much Landscaping goes right up against the 50ft buffer the garage to my eyes looks like it's almost the same size as the house um and I got to think that things could be refigured to get much more work outside of the 100 foot buffer I'm not a fan where the pibs are um I wish I were at the last meeting so I could have uh voiced those questions or concerns but here I am now so yep thanks Ted Melissa yes I I recall the meeting as well but it seems like with Ed abent if um if um T and Denine and uh Judy abstain and there we don't have enough votes one way or the other right we should wait until until Ed here to vote while Matt was there four of us there only three of us present now who are at that meeting right three of us are present that were at yeah me me you and and um Matt uh I can go back and watch the recording before the next meeting yeah I just don't think we can vote tonight because I don't think we if you guys obain I would also be Jim I would also be happy to go back and watch the video if the applicant is comfortable putting a vote off with the answers to the two questions that I was given I'm okay voting tonight um but I think I think that I would be more comfortable voting if I could go back and watch the last meeting y Mitch how do you feel about um continuing so that we can get a better representation of the commission members here and you could clean up some of the paperwork here so we're squeaky clean on the application um I would if we're able to get a have a quorum to vote um I would prefer that occur tonight okay so we would need so so mat Jim Ted myself Janine would you obain yeah okay so that would be four of us four of us voting I think we can vote with four right Anna yes well we onun the risk of splitting but um okay if we vote with four of us does he need three positive three in favor for it to pass or does he need all four of us in favor my understanding is you just need a majority of the voting members to pass majority of the members who are actually voting tonight correct so through the chair um I I would be able voting tonight I'm leaning as being in favor of it with some conditions uh one being that the plan be updated to incorporate the vertical datum that's been requested this is a survey plan that's a struct there's a foundational piece of information that should be on the plan and that the paperwork be updated to reflect the actual impact areas based on Le's comment letter I'd also like to see the checklist completed and submitted for the record given that's a minimum requirement for the filing um it got past the completeness review so you know we've gotten to this point but our regulations are clear Joe's correct that is a that is a required component to a notice of intent filing so I think it's important for for those three items to be included in the final approved package yeah for the chair can I amend Matt's vote to include a signature by Anna oh yeah that wasn't a motion that was just an opinion okay before we go to before we go to a motion just I'm just trying to give Mitch a sense of at least where I am and then and I don't know if any other Commissioners feel it necessary to do so um before we go to a vote but just putting it out there no I think that's good to clear up those conditions because yeah it's a little messy right now um does that cover all the commiss uh all the conditions that commission members would be comfortable um voting within or is there anything else I think that covered everything we talked about about in's thank through the chair did you want to add anything about flagging the Aeries Wetlands to the property line um that comment that comment Joe was for just a just a plan update right extending the line right initially the the both the North and the South uh ends of wetland a um were not extended to the property line but they have extended the the north um side on the on the revised plan but not the south side and as I say the south side doesn't buffer zone doesn't really impact the U the P Europe area yeah I think I'm okay without without making that plan change since it's since it's not impacting the work area I'm okay with that um all right so can I get a motion or Matt do you want to officially make that motion yeah if everyone's else is ready for me to make a motion I'm happy to make the motion to issue an order of conditions with the three conditions previously stated okay and signatures by yeah I'll TR on that all right um so we'll go ahead and do the roll call Vote with Heather abstaining and Janine abstaining from this vote so we have Jim hi Ted no Matt I and I'm going to give it an i um so you are good Mitch as long as you get those three things over us okay yeah thank you commission Matt thank you for uh proposing those conditions and thank you commission members for accepting those conditions and uh we'll look forward to getting you those and um talk to you soon all right thank you all right moving on to all right those are all our hearings um next we have eight Leonard streets request for certificate of compliance um Anna or Judy do you want to go over this through the chair I'm happy to um with potentially some Joe input although I don't uh it was Devon that reviewed the site not Joe so8 Leonard Street is one of three single family houses that were constructed by Wall Street development um down near the end between Maple Street extension and Leonard Street um so new single family house um the isolated Wetland is in the center of the property closest to Leonard Street um Devon did a review on behalf of Lucas environmental um overall pretty positive reviews site in compliance there were some existing landscape features outside of the commission's jurisdiction that are not shown on the plan there's a swing set um there's some Crush Stone around the shed um the there was some additional features that in the commission's jurisdiction such as the rip wrap down along the driveway um I don't know if the commission remembers Mr petroy coming in and um when the water comes down off um the adjacent Street and then Leonard Street it was starting to wash out the driveway so um he had come to the commission to ask if some rip wrap could be installed there to help um protect that driveway from eroding um and the drainage easement p PPE was not shown on the plan so the applicant has updated those two features within the commission's jurisdiction at my request and the homeowners have removed as much of the erosion controls as they could there was a few pieces that are um that were frozen into the ground so they will be removing those in the spring U the homeowners did uh reach out to me and ask there was quite a bit of trash and construction debris in the Wetland so they have hand removed that and made that um much more of a wildlife happy place and um at this point I would recommend the commission consider issuing the certificate of compliance for number eight Leonard Street all right thanks Anna Joe do you have anything to add I don't think so I think Anna pretty much covered it all okay um well that being said does anyone from the commission have any questions comments concerns no no all right can we get a motion to go ahead and um issue the certificate of compliance move second the chair oh signatures by Anna and Judy thank you Anna or Judy um all right so we got a motion in a second and we'll just go down the list here Jim hi Ted hi Janine I Heather hi Matt I and I'm also an i all set um all right next up we have um a vote to we need to vote to allow Judy to sign commission documents um and Anna sent me over language for this so let me pull it up um so yeah I think it's still I think it's a good idea to have Judy and Anna both be allowed to sign for the commission or to you know leave it open for for both of them Anna do we need should we vote for both of you or and or situation or you already have sighting Authority so we just add Judy to a vote for yeah through the chair um I still have a recorded signature Authority so it's just to add Judy as a um additional signature Authority on behalf of the commission so it should be two separate votes I think I sent you yeah you did um okay does anyone have any questions or comments on this before ask her a vote no okay um so vote one is the delegation of signature Authority moved that the like to move that the hopkington Conservation Commission authorized conservation administrator Judy day to physically sign on behalf of the commission when so directed by vote of the commission documents issued by the committee under the wetlands protection act GLC 13140 or the Hoppington Wetland protection by law including but not limited to orders of conditions and certificates of compliance um so mov so moved second all right um all in favor we have um Matt hi Jim Heather hi uh uh Ted I and Janine I all right and I'm also an I vote number two is for electronic signatures move that the Hoppington Conservation Commission recognizes and accepts the provisions the Massachusetts general laws chapter 110g regarding electronic signatures for permitting and compliance documents and that its members will henceforth execute such documents either with electronic signatures or with what signatures and that both will carry the same legal weight and effect the statement applies to permitting and compliance documents issued by the by the commission under the Wetland protection act GLC 13140 section 40 or the hopkington Wetland protection bylaw including but not limited to orders of conditions and certificates of compliance well moved well moved can I a second all right all in favor Janine I Jim hi Matt hi Ted hi Heather hi did I say Janine you did yeah okay I'm an I I think I got everybody sometimes the screen moves around and I get lost all right so we're all set on that um all right next point of business I so I got an email the other day from the town um it's the time of year that we put together our annual um summary of what the commission has done over the past year um for the town mailer uh document that goes out um so Anna has so kindly put last year's in the um in the folder for tonight's meeting under the work session so everybody can take a look and just see you know what we did last year and I asked um Judy and Anna if they could take a crack well probably Anna because Judy doesn't NE know what we did all last year um but maybe Anna can take a stab at um drafting something up and then we can review it um update it if anybody has some fabulous pictures that they want to send over um but one of the things that I noticed that they asked for in the email which we haven't done necessarily in the past was they were asking for goals um for the upcoming year um Anna did shoot me over when she looked in the files the last time the commission did formal goals was in 2008 um so way before any of our time before my time um on the commission so I just wanted to bring it up in this meeting see if anybody had any ideas for goals or if you can think about um goals or things that we might want to put um put out there for 2025 um what we want to do as a commission I think it's good to have goals at least a couple um things we could do differently or improve or things we want to try and achieve in the upcoming year um um one of the things that I would like to put on there is um to put some effort into public education um I think that's one of the areas that we kind of consistently run into and I think it would help us ultimately if people start to really understand what these piib markers mean um you know what wetlands are that they exist that they might have them in their yard where they might go to find them online um and you know I think some of the ways we could do that is maybe um you know putting up at Family Day there were some great booths by different you know the trails committee had one DPW had one um we could kind of get ourselves out there as not just you know being more of an education um component rather than just only time people see us is when they have to come to one of our meeting and get all nervous and present you know or they're in trouble um so that was that was one of my thoughts I don't know if anybody has anything else off the top of their head but Melissa I'll ask you with and and by the way I think we every year we've had goals and I think we've accomplished all of them even though we never wrot about okay I would I would add to to your um you know your the items the things that we need to educate people about would also be COC and uh you know D uh D restrictions and stuff like that that people seem to not pay attention to but it's a great idea I love it okay um yeah and and can think of things too and anything to make their lives easier um and by the way this is for the annual report right it's for the annual report yeah yeah yep so yeah I think you're hm we probably had goals and and things that we've done over the years for sure just not necessarily documented or written them or set you know I think when you write them down it helps reinforce and you know feel good helps us to think about yeah it helps us to think about what we want to accomplish but we've also exceeded expectations by the way of course um all right that was it if you think of anything feel free to email Anna or Judy if they you know over the next couple weeks or bring them to the next meeting um that would be appreciated and I think I think that's I think that's it we don't have any public forum or anything right Anna correct yep good okay um so with that I'll could I get a motion to close the hearing meeting I'll make a motion to adjourn and I will second Jim's motion all right so all in favor Janine I Matt I hi Ted hi Jim hi Heather hi and I am an i and Happy Thanksgiving everybody and we have had a good year same to you yes Thanksgiving changes though we've had some major changes this year H three big ones yeah yeah we have we have so yeah here guys play football on the backyard after you eat those six, to sounds good