so Dan okay uh pursuing on3 Bill extending several is there a problem uh your your your screen is frozen but the audio is coming through oh okay um all right uh anyway uh pursuant to Governor Healey's March 29th 20123 Bill extending several Co era policies and programs by allowing virtual meetings to to continue from March 31st 2023 to March 31st 2025 this meeting of the Norton Conservation Commission will be conducted via remote participation to the greatest extent possible specific information and the general guidelines for remote participation by members of the public Andor parties with the right Andor requirement to attend this meeting can be found at the end of this agenda members of the public attending this public hearing meeting virtually will be allowed to make comments if they wish to do so during the portion of the hearing designated for public comment by raising their hand virtually or pressing star9 if participating by phone no in-person attendance of members of the public will be permitted but every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings in in real time via technological means in the event that we are unable to do so despite best efforts we will post on the Norton Cable website www. Norton media center.org an audio or video recording transcript or other comprehensive record of proceedings as soon as possible after the meeting thank you Dan so uh we have a full board tonight parti ipating uh first is myself Julian kades chair we have Lisa kosa Vice chair uh and Dan Pearson clerk uh as well as Joseph carvalo Tom vest Mark Fernandez and Paxton H I think I got everybody there uh and we also have um John Thomas our director and our assistant Megan are up participating so our first um um new public hearing is file number 250- 11157 concerning a septic system upgrade at 39 andt Drive do we have a representative of that project yes um my name is David clinck good evening everyone I'm from Colin Civil Engineering Group you probably have screens sharing uh capabilities at this point all right um I can share my screen here and if you can let me know that you see the plan in front of you we see it you'll just have to um expand it a little bit right L that looks good all right so uh I'm here tonight to uh um file an noi with um 39 anine drive for a septic repair and I can go over the plan quickly here for with you and answer any questions you might have um there is a stream on the very uh South off the south side of the property uh the high water mark was delineated by Brook Monroe uh we have a W uh Wetland line that pretty much surrounds the property in green and that was also Del delineated by Brook Monroe and so we have an orange line here you can see this Orange Line This is the 50ft buffer to the wet Lane line and we have the purple line as the 100 foot buffer to the white L line these two blue lines are the 100 foot River Front area and the 200t river front area um The Proposal is to um abandon the existing septic system which is are these trenches here they have failed and this tank here uh we're going to abandon the septic system we'll probably have to remove some of the remove the tank because our new tank will be right on top of a portion of it uh but the field we're not going to touch we're just going to abandon it in place with a distribution box it's in a grassed area uh and it will be abandoned uh we're we're going to do a two compartment tank um this is all gravity flow and it will flow into a new um Stone entrenched Le ing system they seem to work the the best uh it's kind of oldfashioned stone and trench but they last forever and they and they work great um and that's what we're proposing here um we're going to have a limit of work line which is this red line and this red line is going to surround the limit of work and it's pretty much going to start at the corner of the house move around the area this is all grass area by the way this is all lawn now here this is kind of wooded here but we're going to we're going to have to moove some of the Woodland right in this corner um but we're proposing the uh the the limit of work line to come up and come over to the shed here the the septic system itself will be completely outside the 50-ft buffer here's the 50ft buffer here um it is going to be 68 feet from the Wetland and 89 ft from the riverfront area um the limit of work will be 53 ft from the Wetland area as close as it gets there is a driveway here which will be our access into the property and we're going to put a erosion control fence along the driveway there will be trucks entering the driveway here and moving around to the back um and this will be in place uh to protect these Wetlands on on this side of the property there's a catch base in here and a catch base in here there will be silt sack set in those catch basins uh the street will be cleaned every day we have notes for the street being cleaned every day after the work after the work is done and um this is uh pretty much it it's going to be uh pretty flat system you can see elevation 50 right here and the top of our system is right at 50 and it will drop off in the back here's 49 so it's going to work almost almost nice with the grades that are out there um that's about it um we we have a nice existing deck um and we want to keep that intact uh this but we can do that and keep it a gravity fade and still meet all the Board of Health requirements as well uh the house was built in '95 um and so it kind of precedes uh the the riverfront area but we do meet the uh criteria for the riverfront area in the wetlands protection act um all right you ready for question questions then sure uh any questions from commission members um I I have several um okay where is the um equipment going to access I assume from the left side of the house and yeah the on the left side of the house and then if so are there any trees that need to be taken down there because I'm there's one tree here but we can get around that tree there's about 20 fet and between the house and the tree so that's the only tree that would be in question and we can get around that tree all the equipment is going to be coming in off the driveway and then around the corner of the house hugging the house uh it will all be on pred Disturbed grass areas so I mean I understand you can't put tree protection so normally tree protection to save the roots of the tree um has to go with a drip line and it doesn't look like you can do that here so I would ask that you put some type of barrier up so that the contractor um you know hugs that side of the house side and not the tree side yeah maybe maybe we could put uh some orange Steaks around the base of the tree uh to keep them away from the from the well not not the base because that's to that's giving them too much space yeah that's giving them too much space so I would measure 20 feet from uh did you say the house there yeah and then give them that space there is a there is a paain driveway that comes out out to the end here and we're going to use that quite a bit to get to the back so there's already pavement right here and will utilize that to access the back of the house as well okay you just have to instruct the contractor you might know that right but you got to articulate that on the plan set um the next thing is is there any way to um relocate that system so it's out of the inner riparian Zone if you shifted it to the soils we we put the system where the soils are and we have to have the system within the the the perc relation test um but yeah you didn't perk further south though the soils don't work very well up here and if we move it this way um we're going to be closer to the 50 possibly in the 50 and we're going to be taking out more Woods um okay yeah that was my my question is that if you do move cuz you know you're supposed to look at alternatives to minimizing the intrusion in the riverfront so if you could you know walk us through that so if you were have Shi itself South you would potentially have to cut down additional trees whereas it looks like most of it now may be on lawn it is online yeah um okay and then do you how much space are you using between the southern end where it says liner end in the limit of work there it seems to go up to that tree uh this tree here no uh to the South to the South yeah this do and do you need all that space to construct it um you know we trying to limmit the footprint there's there you know TR once you set these in stone you like to have a a maneuverability on at least three sides to back fill it uh you don't want to travel over the system uh this is very important you don't want to compact anything around the system so we're trying to leave them enough room to come over here add some fill because they're going to have to fill with lman seed and and put top soil on um and if we can do that so that they can get around three sides of it it the system isn't going to be compromised so we kind of want to give them a little bit of room to maneuver a machine around there to dump material there if we have to um I suppose we can move it a little bit closer but it it really is is you know we probably move it a little bit closer here and here but does that start to interfere with those larger trees and then how how many trees are you taking down in in Riverfront there uh we're taking down no trees in the riverfront area no trees okay so I'm sorry uh we're not we're not going to take down any trees in the 100 foot riverr front area and we're going to take down zero trees in the 200 foot River Front area no trees okay okay and then the last um comment I had was your um sediment control detail has has the stake going through it and that's really you need to put it on the outside of it because once you drive the stake through it it compromises the material so if you um look around a lot of the manufacturers now have the stakes on either side of it or one side of it at a 45 degree angle and sure he could change that that would be great yeah I have actually seen uh where they put takes on both sides of the waddle and then they crisscross it with rope yeah and that keeps the I've seen that method as well um yeah yeah once you put the the problem is once you put the Stak through it compromises the The netting and it compromises The Filling you know from from the get-go there's a hole in it so it's not very effective and it degrades quicker thank you um any other questions from commission members I have a quick one are there going to be any materials stored onite or is this going to be worked out of the back of a truck uh there will be uh because we have room in this area they're probably materials dumped on site but removed immediately so it's either going to be dumped on site or piled on site and removed or dumped on site and used U but it will be it will be fast it will be you know a day or you know a day someone com shows up and dump something will spread it that day so Stone um and back fill material and lman seed for stabilization uh yeah that will be dumped on site but it will be spread immediately all right thank you uh John any comments about this uh the only thing that I actually did some research on this property um and I pulled a file I actually got through the with the building department uh the deck on the property I think it was installed after the uh Rivers protection act so that should be incorporated into the cumulative Riverfront disturbance for the site uh if there's a new buyer or a new um new owner they're going to have to make sure to have that on record for them if they want to do any new work to the property um so I guess David if you could just uh you know send me over a calculation of what the I guess the square footage of that existing deck are I Mayan we can put that in to the Cals uh if the commission would choose to um close and issue an order conditions on this yeah I can um I can actually I can definitely do that uh based on the size of the septic system um that was about 1,400 Square F feet I would say the deck is not much larger than that but I can I can get those numbers to you okay good all right so any questions from any participant in the meeting on this project um so if not it seems like you you implied John that there's enough information provided that we can go ahead and close tonight and generate an order of conditions by next meeting if the commission is amenable to closing and issuing an order conditions we can do that for the next meeting yeah I would just ask that you update the settlement control detail and then John Thomas if you can add a preconstruction condition um that asks them to um Mark out the access on the south side I'll put that as as a finding and a condition yeah I can I can uh I can make those changes to the plan and have them to the uh to the board tomorrow thank you David all right if there are no further questions or discussion we can consider a motion to close um public hearing for number 250- 11157 so moved second we have a motion made by Lisa second by Joe um so roll call vote uh beginning with Paxton and Dan hi hi Joe and Tama hi hi Lisa and Mark I I and I'll throw in an I so the motion carries so we expect to to vote on a an order of conditions at our next meeting which is June 24th um that completes our new public hearings we have quite a list of continued public hearings first thank you uh first on that is file number 250 11440 Reservoir Street uh proposal for a 14 Lot subdivision do we have a a representative of the applicant we do uh Mr chair uh Ned corkran Council from Milton on behalf of the applicant and I'm joined by Cameron Campbell who's the project engineer um I think fundamentally just as an introductory um we debated at the last hearing on May 6 whether we would be entitled to a waiver from the the standards of the Town storm Water Management bylaw I think we had read that bylaw in error and had assumed that we had to be compliant with all four of the standards relative to the uh removal of uh total suspended solids and phosphorus and when it and in fact the bylaw reads as an or situation where you need to be compliant with one but not four um we certainly misread that um and so we think in this case we demonstrated compliance with at least one of the other one of those standards and your peerreview um peer-reviewer seems to have concurred with that with her late latest email to uh the town um so with respect to that I'd hand it to Cameron uh to sort of review uh where things stand and I think we're going to probably be in a position to request the board the commission to close the hearing tonight and uh issue an order of conditions thank you going Cameron Campbell with the sber Sala uh So the plan hasn't changed at all since the last time you saw it because we did we did trailer research and noticed that we actually do meet the uh storm water byw that we were asking for a waiver on uh and we meet it by the five water quality uh units and the water quality tank with all the filters in it it does 90% TS removal and 60% ferous removal so the so we meet we no longer need a waiver from the norn stor water byla we're still looking for uh we're within the 25 foot no disturb uh on three of the outfalls which we discussed I believe on the April 8th meeting and it was in uh the Northeast I can bring up the Plan F can you all see that not quite yet all right we can but it's U it's your first yeah the cover sheet yeah so up here in the front we have one outfall which is outside the 25 ft but the grading encroaches onto the 25 foot and then these two a little more to the to the West can you zoom in on that little bit better detail thanks y see if I can get to it so we have the one for the rain Garden which is a 4in pipe uh the actual outfall is outside the 25 foot puffer the grading will have to encroach in slightly and then we have a double tandem uh two 12in out outfall pipes from the constructed stor water wetland which encroaches into the 25t buffer and then we have a CT that essentially transports the runoff over from the Overland runoff along the center portion of the site and just uh transfer it back over to the Wetland which because originally it was to not have the cut off for the water flow because the waterf flow was there naturally now and then with the roadway it would cut it off so we added the cover to keep a hydraulic connection through that area those are the only three uh sections in within the 25t buffer and we're open to a condition to replant any sort of disturbance for trees or whatnot and working around the trees and then uh revegetating the area that has been Disturbed as well any from a third condition would be willing to accept the condition that um the work within the 25 ft would be done with with hand tools that heavy equipment would not be allowed to enter into the 25 foot area that's I think the area is a small probably easily manageable with with hand tools as opposed to a back ho or similar so it it looks like you have a retaining wall right adjacent uh and that retaining wall is a variable height is that uh or is it one fixed height it all step slightly uh it only it's only a two foot I want to say a twoot difference between the top of the wall at the the far end and then the low end so it'll Step Up slightly as you come up but it'll it'll match the existing grade at the bottom side can I ask if that is that the top of the wall that you're showing or the toe of the wall and did you give enough room to construct the wall so in plan view are we looking at the top of the wall in footprint or is there a footing associated with the wall I'm just trying to get a handle on whether that's the true representation of the wall limits at the 25 or it actually extends in more into the 25 because of the footing and construction of the wall the wall all shown is a it's shown as a foot wide H we're looking at the top uh if it batters it'll go I want to say it's like four feet at the highest maybe a little bit further up a little higher up here in the top uh right away from the 25 foot so it'll batter a foot at most is that Gray Line and then we have the path yeah we have the pathway between the wall and 25t buffer so this is sorry so I'm asking that's not a true representation of how much space that you'll need to construct that wall correct you'll need some room on the other side of that so right now you're showing when the when the wall is built but the actual intrusion into the 25 is going to be more while you're constructing the wall you need a construction zone over there I assume it's a it's fill wall so the the bottom side of the wall you don't need much room to build it it's the top side that you need the room to back fill it in and put in the mesh so will they be working it from the up the Upland side then yeah yeah so you mentioned planting trees in the location that's disturb but it almost doesn't make sense because you're going to have a rip wrap and you don't want trees over the rip wrap or the pipe so can you um come up with something that maybe reestablishes planting somewhere else uh number one and number two did you look at eliminating the intrusion what alternatives did you look at for actually eliminating the intrusion into the 25 all together could could the road and the um infiltration Basin be shifted to the left at all would that alleviate it it couldn't because of the elevation so if I shift everything to the left it makes those outfall pipes longer which ends up having to be lower on the outfall so we're maxed out for where the outfall is based on the elevation of the pipes John Thomas I know we've allowed work in the 25 but that's typically for redevelopment what about for new development do we have a handle on that I honest so for for a virgin site I don't yeah I mean for if I'm looking at this and I I I see this is that you know and I was doing this project is my question would be why can't we just outfall to the center of the site why do we have to outfall to the to the to the Wetland I guess that's my question uh elevation wise the Wetland is a low point I mean you're if I try the outfall at say rip WP four in the center right here you you have to be around 1094 the elevation on this site is 114 in the center so you can't there's no elol okay so you're dealing with you're dealing with elevations and you're dealing with grades and from what I remember is that you said you got to bring fil in on site right uh not in uh a little bit but not in this section we're actually cutting a little in this section to make that Wetland MH cuz it's it's a constructive Wetland so you want some water in it right and uh the roadway is filled right actual feet of Road of fill in for that roadway so you're actually causing the the issue with having to intrude into the 25 because of the fill in Road essentially for the head wall yeah yeah well is the Wall constructed first before where the fill is put in for the road yeah you can STP the wall as you st the wall and back fill at the same time you you do sections and then back fill slightly and then do a little more and back fill I I guess my my my point Julian is the whole the reason that the pipe extends into the Wetland is because of the amount of fill so if that road were at great and you didn't need to bring in as much fill the pipe could end it would be shorter so it's it's like the chicken in the egg so but we know that if you didn't put that much Phil the road would do potentially yeah potentially do work yeah uh are you all Lisa yes I I I mean this is perhaps not a fair question but how did you misread the bylaw I mean that it it takes a little bit of skimming to miss the the ores um yeah just I I read through that section quickly and I saw the one inch which is I kind of missed it with I kind of associated it with the infiltration requirement and didn't realize it was part of the treatment requirement well it did throw it was my fault yeah it did throw a lot of the discussion on its ear uh in the in this whole hearing because of of your request for a uh an exemption I read the same sex Mr chair and I gloss I missed it as well and so that's a apologies to the commission for the time spent discussing what really didn't need to be discussed and I know how valuable your time is so appreciate that well it's not a matter of value it's it's you know it's it's just a a lot of head scratching went into that discussion and only to find out that it's that it's a a mistake and uh and I guess I guess from my point of view um we need the reassurance of the peer reviewer that they agree that that currently this design does meet the storm water standards and and John maybe you can help us with that that uh in discussions with the peer reviewer are you completely comfortable now that uh the system works as it's supposed to work I mean as it pertains to the regulations it meets all the standards um per horel whittens uh evaluation from my own kind of understanding of the town of Norton is that we've been subjected and I've seen it all around town because I've had to go out on site visits and and evaluate certain issues that we've had here in town but you know we've had been having a lot of significant storms more frequently the last couple years and part of the issue that I have is that you know if your if your system can't withstand at least an inch and a half of rain over you know uh you know 24-hour period and you have flooding issues then there's a drainage problem and I've been seeing it from all the old historic um projects to current you know within the last 15 20 years some drainage systems that in town and you know I just don't want to say that everything's hunky dory when I know that you know there's potential for you know Flooding at this location which you know I just think there is potential for it but unfortunately you know the regulations say that it's okay um and for me you know it's a challenge because you know I know that I'm going to probably let the town know from a management side not to take G this roadway because of the potential problems that come with the um whole burden and maintenance upkeep for this roadway uh given that the soils are you know poorly drained or you know have um I guess low permeability and infiltration might be an issue and there might be stagnant water that sits in these areas and causes flooding issues so you know it's hard for me to to basically basically not trying to play Devil's Advocate but you know there's two sides of this and I think it's important that you know regul regulation wise yes it meets everything but realistic you know uh kind of current kind of what I see on a day-to-day basis I have I have concerns and I'm G to have concerns um if it the site can't you know infiltrate in 24 hours with an inch of rain well the systems aren't designed to infiltrate within 24 hours they empty out through their Outlets within 24 hours right I understand but for instance the the challenge that we have is the system that you've you've kind of shown is very close to Reservoir Street and the other area that you have where it's outling to a wetland that's going to flood and that's going to probably impact The Neighbor Next Door so that's the challenge I have in front of me with saying that everything's okay is that I can't I can't be very confident knowing that for instance your system might have potential flooding issues because of the low permeability of the soil so for me as the storm STM water agent I'm it's difficult for me because I'm wearing two hats right now one of me saying this this is this is a concern the other one other part of me the conservation director is saying that it meets all the regulations and standards and that's where my my two roles are conflicting with each other we're having a little quarrel so so I I don't think there's any answer that I can give the commission as to you know is this something that they could permit yes it is something that they can permit because it meets all the standards from um from the uh conservation regulations and the storm water handbook that that Janet and horley Whitten have recommended it's just I have reservations as to when this does go to construction the potential um you know long-term um I guess issues that may may come of of this because of the current soil conditions in this area I'm sorry go ahead is there any way we could have a ask them to post a bond or anything for it and I I think that would be something that I would put on the planning board um because that's the shity bond they put in place for it and the developer and uh you know and that's the only thing that I can think of that would be able to um make those kind of reservations a little bit less uh is that if there were any issues they would be on the hook for making sure that uh they just fix that if possible right so so right now we're looking at a design that meets the criteria under the storm water management standards and the only relief they're looking for is work within the 25 in in three locations right that's correct okay thanks um think that there is a requirement for a bond um within the uh the decision issued by the planning board uh approving uh subdivision do you know if that includes storm water or is it just performance bond to construct the subdivision that's a good question yeah I I don't know if it extends to om andm um I think it would be reasonable condition to impose a similar bond in this case I know what the conservation commissions do to to at least cover some portion of omm there will be a homeowners association that's responsible um so I guess John the question is whether we ask the planning board to look into ex extending the bond past construction term to operation or the commission does and we tie it to the COC is that something we want to undertake or since the planning board is is already going to go after a bond we just let them do it or ask them to do it uh we could word it in a way where we collaborate together for the issuance of the charity Bond um somebody's gonna have to put a price tag on that right exactly it's not gonna be easy no it's not um so but what I'm hearing is um uh this is is now in sufficient compliance that we can consider closing this tonight is that a fair state statement I I think that's a fair statement I just want to make sure that um you know like I just said is that this there's we have this on the wraps for kind of understanding you know potential put safeguards basically in place uh to ensure that this uh is properly maintained uh moving forward and um if there are any issues they're addressed immediately John I'm happy to work with with um John to develop language that would be appropriate if that's helpful certainly that could be reviewed uh by the commission at its next hearing Could you um is there a quantification of impacts in the 25 and and we probably want to write that in our findings and also um you mentioned tree planting which I don't think is going to be viable in the same location but uh maybe we condition this John that says that they come up with a tree inventory or or square foot inventory of what's going to be disturbed in the 25 and how they're going to mitigate for that I think that sounds like a great suggestion okay we can I can submit a um a simple but effective form of tree preservation plan replacement plan and we would certainly uh um just come off of a crazy uh development project in Milton where we had to inventory every tree within within the commission's jurisdiction um I don't think we're going to be asking for that but I certainly within the 25t disturb any any tree that would be removed above caliper of say 3 in um would be um inventoried and then replaced Elsewhere on site in a location to be determined um you know in in the field well a tree is 4 in in diameter just so that way you know that's what signifies a tree okay I've been in cases where they get 3.5 inches I'm I'm gonna put I'm gonna I'm gonna say four that's fine okay everything less than that is considered a sapling [Music] all right so um unless there are further questions from the commission members uh we can open it up to any participant in the meeting having any questions about this project and if not um I think we can consider a motion to close it's been kind of a long call with this particular project I'll make a motion to close the public hearing for file 250-1 144 second uh so we have a motion by Lisa seconded by Mark and roll call vote Lisa and Mark how do you vote hi hi and we have uh Joe and Dan next I Jo I don't know if you did a a vote there but you're you're still on mute right I I'm afraid you were over over talked so what was it opposed so that's a that's a no you you want to continue to discuss this longer about will registered as a note Paxton and uh Tama hi I and I'll vote to close the hearing uh so we have six eyes one nay and the motion carries uh so we will be generating a notice notice and attend a uh order of conditions which we will be deliberating on at our next meeting on June 24th so Ned what I will do is I will start drafting something up for you um and if you want to just send me over some language I can incorporate it we can collaborate okay sounds great thank you all right thank you thank you Mr chairman yes chairman can I can I change my vote to an a uh yeah just so we're clear just so we're clear this isn't about the project denying the project never mind only to close the public hearing never mind yeah we're just closing we're just closing um so the next project is file number 250- 1151 300 South Washington Street uh as I recall pretty much everything was settled and we held it open only because there was a 21 day period of time between meetings uh and we needed to hold hold it open for procedural purposes so John correct me unless um it's my understanding we can proceed to close this uh since we're considering an order of conditions tonight that's correct all right so I can entertain a motion to close uh file number 250 the hearing for file number 250-1 51 [Music] um microc seconds involved Tom I think you got the motion and Lisa you're the second all right uh So Lisa and Mark how do you vote hi hi Paxton and Dan hi hi and and who I missing Joe Joe hi hi and I'll throw and I so the motion carries uh we can consider the order of conditions later in the meeting but the hearing is now closed next file is 250- 1156 61 West Main Street um a u filing after the fact for honey du dolance we actually have um one earlier filing that we discussed about closing last time but I think John you were you were had tied up with another meeting at the time so um again um I I don't recall that there was new information to be brought forward is that uh um Mr chairman for the applicant um for honey D Donuts Association um Eric Das registered professional engineer with coin engineering um I do have some I I don't have we didn't present new information before the meeting um they really wasn't much to present but we certainly have an update that we'd love to provide um and discuss with the commission um on the after the fact filing if that would be acceptable yeah okay great um if it's okay I'm going to just share my screen real quick so I think it helps us all to look at a plan as we talk uh that is the last one this is the new one I'm going to zoom in okay so just a quick recap so the last time we were here obviously we did talk about some work that was performed um on site partially within the buffer zone um and we noted a couple of things yes that it should have been filed um it to some degree in fact it may have possibly gotten away with an RDA rather than noi if it was filed appropriately but that's neither here nor there um primarily what happened is they increased the amount of peria surface on the site both within the buffer zone um and outside of the buffer zone by way of adding some Landscaping to improve the parking conditions and way finding for people going to the drive-thru um so we do present that as an overall betterment to the site um with regard to storm water control and things like that as you know the more impervious surface we get away from the more we promote um retention on site we promote groundwater rear etc etc um so the question that came up was really the the conversation focused around storm water um two questions one what is the storm water system on site and two had this come forward and was filed appropriately would there have been an opportunity for the existing storm water site to be improved at that time um so I didn't have an answer to that the last time we met so this is a new information that I do have for you um I went out to the site and we opened every one of these catch basins there are six there are four along the back curb line here there is one in this corner of the landscaping and there is one at this location near the um the entrance they are all infiltrating catch bases there is no pipes they don't discharge anywhere um so that's what the system is with regard to whether or not there would have been an opportunity for a betterment of the system if this had come forward as a notice of intent prior to the work being done um with an infiltrating catch base in a system like this they provide great groundwater recharge uh the site is there's no reports of flooding so we're good there um if they lack anywhere it's with a little bit of of water quot uh especially in the way of free treatment um in order to correct that is a pretty solid overhaul of the system um and I would argue or pait at least that had that been required at the time the applicant probably would have just withdrawn and not made any betterment to the site um so the other thing that I can tell you with regard to the existing system is this this whole process has been brought up by the fact that this site is up for possible sale to a developer um this whole process came about to facilitate that sale um so what the plan is at this time is to move forward with a new development on this site once this process is closed out um I do represent the developer so we will be coming forward with a completely new site design that will include a completely new storm water system that will meet um all of the current state and local standards uh just a short matter time before we get to that point in the meantime um the current owners of the Honeydew Donuts have agreed to the to clean the catch basins that are there now just of Faith to try to make some improvement beyond what they've done with the Landscaping um so that's what I have to offer at the moment I'm glad to take and answer any questions so it sounds like uh the whole issue of upating the current system is kind of moot from what you presented yeah you know if if it was to be upgraded at this time it would not be a small undertaking and it it practically from the position that both the O that the owner is in it doesn't make sense um so in a very short time we will be coming forward with something that is much more comprehensive than what you see here so questions from anyone oh I have concerns yeah um might not make sense from a financial perspective but to have untreated runoff going directly to the groundwater is not a good thing so I completely disagree um I'm shocked that they weren't cleaning these catch basins to begin with like to to offer catch Basin cleaning come on that's you know they should have been doing that anyway so that's not a gift to me okay that's not that's not an impr Improvement they should have been doing that anyway um and we have no idea if this real estate transaction is going to take place that's not what's in front of us right now so I would ask that you put something together to show us what it would take to improve stor water quality um on this project that's my two cents okay um what I what I can suggest um and if I was sitting on your side of this table I would say the same thing right what if it doesn't what if there's no proposal brought before us uh for a new system here then we're kind of missing up quite at the Apple so what I might suggest to combat that is if in order if after the fact the order was to be issued on this property it could contain a continuing condition that would say something to the effect of if a new proposal is not brought forward within an acceptable time frame whatever that is something reasonable this commission could call the owner back in to revisit this issue um and at that point it would be enforceable um so that does give the commission some degree of Leverage should they choose to allow the owner that degree of levity at this point so so that means my groundwater quality has to wait potentially up to three years to get cleaned cleaned up I wouldn't put it quite that long I don't believe that that would oh the order is going to be valid for three years correct and then they're going to you know be looking for close out so um actually because of the real estate transaction uh ideally what would happen is and after the fact order would be issued and then as soon as the appeal period was to end we would come forward with a request for a certificate of compliance which is why I would suggest such a condition be made a continuing condition well we wouldn't issue a certificate of compliance until that work was done at least I wouldn't as I said um even if it was as a continuing condition it would be enforceable so the commission could issue the C they choose to and still be protected all right further questions [Music] comments John any comments on this um yeah this is this is a unique case I guess because this whole thing came came about because of the potential sale and transaction um we pulled the files uh to see what the history was for the project site found out there was some issues um with parking lot and this is the reason why they're here here um so you know I can understand you know Lisa's points I can understand Eric's points um I'm just trying to think of a potential Common Ground where uh we can find some sort of resolution uh to um you know keep keep the I mean I I understand both points just it's just a matter of what the commission feels amenable with um with uh this I guess scenario or conundrum that we kind of have they did some after action work looking for some uh liid improvements for the site the applicants basically stating that you know this is potentially going to hold them up and they won't be able to do the liid improvements um so I I I think we got like a double-edged sword here kind of scenario and I I don't know how how to advise the commission on this one I guess if they feel um to give the applicant good faith or if they feel that there's more require needed um now I guess the owner is different than the applicant in this sense so the applicant is is is the buyer is that correct Eric um for this particular application the applicant is the owner mov okay forward the applicant would be the buyer okay the other thing and not to cut you off John too and I know um the commissioner had said that three years is certainly too long and we agree um we we certainly you know don't want to sit on this property for three years at all we want to move as fast as possible so I guess I would ask the question if we were to entertain such a thing what would be an acceptable time frame um to that we could work with them in my view you're you're asking for a de facto notice of intent so I would say as soon as possible because every day that you wait there this is a high I won't say it's a level you have high-intensity oil grease you have a lot of people coming in here every day it's not just you know it's it's got a heavy use for vehicles so do we do we think that sediment trap um systems for the Basin for the current basins would be something they should put in as a temporary measure right now what do you mean sediment trap sorry the filter socks sorry I apologize do you think that's something they should put in now is that going to do anything no I'll keep TSS out of it for sure um no I'm looking at oil oil and grease right now does it what what do the I mean I assume they're they're not do they at least have a hood do they have anything in them um infiltrating catch Basin don't have a hood no they don't right so it's it's even worse so there's zero do they even have they don't even have a sum right so everything everything every pollutant goes right into the groundwater this is what we're talking about I don't disagree I would note to you however that you know this honeydew Donuts has been here with this exact drainage system for a very long time um you that's all the more reason to get it fixed now it's the anomaly and and nothing you know once somebody comes before the commission it is Our obligation to make sure that the site is improved and this is not constitu Improvement in my eyes because we're continuing to discharge pollutants directly to groundwater well I'm not disagreeing with you my only point would be that the small amount of time that we're asking for to bring forward a much more complete design for the site would certainly pale in comparison to the time that it's been happening for um additionally um as I said before it does at some point become a decision that the owner has to make and if it's not financially feasible it likely is a decision that they won't be able to move forward so every moment that we do spend in this conversation is another day that holds up the sale and keeps us further from getting the commission basically exactly what they're asking for which is a much better drainage system um and again I complete let me say I do understand um the commission's concerns I do storm water peer review myself in many neighboring towns I I understand um I understand what the regulation says I am simply trying to find a way to push this forward in both of my clients in the town's best interest and I do believe that you know giving us an opportunity to move forward with proper site design and putting a continuing condition on it would give the commission some degree of protection um it would certainly give the commission the ability to drag the owner back in here if something doesn't happen in timely fashion yeah but that's not the business we're in so I I would not if I enter entertain putting a condition on I certainly wouldn't do it in perpetuity I would give you a time frame which in which to um redevelop this property with the correct um controls in perpetuity is not good we're not going to go chasing people with in with conditions and perpetuity so um we're going to have to come up with a time frame John Thomas so I guess I'm sorry um so what is the the time frame and correct me if I'm wrong you're talking about a conditioning a time frame well Eric saying we put it in as a as a as a condition in perpetuity and I disagree with that because then then it's you know it's it's open-ended we could close out the certificate of compliance it's you know we're not going to go chasing people with a with a Perpetual condition that doesn't work so so it would have to be a condition that says you know if it's not I'm just throwing this out there if it's not redeveloped uh if the site's not redeveloped within six months eight months a year whatever it is uh you know typically it takes 9 to 12 months to do this um then we can ask them to do it so think needs a condition needs to be a direct condition not a condition that's in the perpetuity column Eric can you live with a condition for of 12 months I can definitely live with a 12 month condition I think that's absolutely reasonable my only question the caveat that I have to that is this until the order can be closed out the the transaction to transfer this property and begin the design and permitting of a new project can't happen which is why I would ask for it to be a a condition that would last beyond the issuing of certificate of compliance which is why I said A continuing condition it doesn't perpetuity I have no problem with the 12 month limit so we can put it in both places then I don't care how many times we write it how many places we put it right so we put one in that if it doesn't happen in 12 months they have to do something and then we'll throw in the perpetuity column as well if that helps um yeah yeah it's I'll tell you the honest truth from my standpoint I think 12 months works as long as whatever that condition says I have the ability or I should say the client the owner has the ability to come and request a certificate of compliance from this order so that the transaction can move forward um when this appeal period expires that allows the transaction to go through the buyer to purchase the property we get to work on design and we've got a new design before you um as soon as possible and let me just say this too um the buyer who I do represent that's how I got involved has already met with departments in town um he's very very serious about moving this forward we met with the planner we've met with the building inspector it it is a very very serious Prospect um and I have no reason to think that if we're successful with this project it won't go all the way through so let me ask you this say we issue um and then we close it out and then that project never moves forward then what we have to go after honeydew to make improvements you would be dragging whoever owns that at the time back here with a yes that's correct which to be you know any respectable business owner if they receive an enforcement order for some reason like this they're going to come deal with it um you know I have no I I don't know that honeydew's ever been a bad neighbor or a bad citizen in town um so I have no reason to be concerned about that oh we've been burned in the past don't let that fo you that as well I do no with promises yeah no I the commission needs protection I I understand that um so that's John I think we're going to have to think this through I think we're going to have to use a little brain power and think this through so that our re are covered 15 ways till Tuesday no matter what happens with writing and with writing a potential order conditions yeah yeah yeah I'm I'm thinking of it in my head and I I definitely need to be in front of a Microsoft Word while I write this so um yes why why don't I why don't I do this is that um I think there's another uh thing on the docket this evening um for uh 61 is it West Main Street yeah for the for the COC that was done pre previously um why don't I start drafting up a potential order for this project and see if I can make heads or taals of it and for the next meeting um we can potentially close an issue of potential order conditions then uh for this and we can try to make heads or tailes of of the discussion and what the terms of the conditions are going to be for us for this project moving forward but but John there have been certificates of compliance that we've issued with uh conditions in perpetuity is that not the case that is that is correct so so for instance we can um make sure that that condition that's highlighted is in a Perpetual condition um selectively in the issu issued COC so we can do that and if I want to add just the idea of it being a a a condition in perpetuity does not negate putting a timeline on it either at all so it can be a a quote unquote condition in perpetuity but the condition can certainly read to the effect of you know if a project is not brought forward within a 12- Monon period um etc etc etc now I guess the question that I have so I can draft this up correctly is does the commission want to discuss and deliberate a time frame uh six months 12 months I think we we thought 12 months would would work yeah how far along are they in the design process Eric um we are kind of at the infancy stages of design we haven't done soil testing or anything like that I I think it would be certainly reasonable for us to have be back before you with a formal submiss submission within 12 months um and if I know my client on this we're going to be pushing to get it here even sooner than that okay I guess I was thinking more construction too I mean is this going to be demo a demo or a rehab do you know um I both options are on the table at this time um I I do know that no matter what it is we would be looking at some form of expansion which is automatically going storm water okay so John maybe we have to write it uh we have to tie it to a new notice of intent filing not the end of construction or the start of construction right so we have to it to a filing a new filing I think yeah a filing needs to be amount of time something like that yeah yep a new filing shall be provided to the commission within 12 months something something right yep okay yeah I think I mean I I again I don't know where you are in the design stage but it can take some months to get stuff together I get it yeah no I I understand I appreciate you know you guys even entertaining the conversation with us so thank you all right so unless there are further questions I think we've hashed things out to the point where we can close this hearing uh and then consider a not a order of conditions for this retrospective so before before we actually um well we can wait till next week when we or next two weeks when we order the conditions but we'll have to make sure to close the other COC first before we issue an order just want to make that not well I think that's on the agenda later in this uh meeting I know I'm just making I'm making a statement yes that was kind of the nested egg that we're going to deal with next I mean at the end of our hearings um so uh further questions comments if not we can entertain a motion to close the public hearing for file number 250- 11156 second motion made by Lisa seconded by Mark so um Joe and Mark how do you vote hi hi T and Dan hi hi and Paxton and is it Lisa do that the where I am I I and I'll throw in an I so the motion carries uh thank you Eric uh we'll be dealing with the other one later thank you all um and again I I do really appreciate the commission's willingness to work with us on this I know it's an unusual case so thank you all for your consideration thanks for coming in so next up uh is U zero Crane Street a total of three files uh 250-1 52 53 and 54 that we prev previously been discussing discussing at the unit um and do we have a representative who can clarify the out outstanding discussion um outstanding information hello it's Evan Watson here with W engineering okay so take it away take it away I mean maybe I know we we discussed the issue of potential Vernal pool and it will be treated as a potential Vernal pool we discussed the issue of uh storm water management and I thought that that was resolved um and I see there's a a new wrinkle with regard to some possible road work maybe but that's more in the realm of planning I think m yes so um let me just put the plan up on the screen so we can uh [Music] just so I'll flip over to the plan here so I did uh since the last meeting I did provide a little bit of additional information um there was a concern that was brought up um we have Construction entrances leading to the lots and we had one that was going to the abing property um it was brought to our attention that there was some um other people with interest in that um with conservation permits Etc so we eliminated um any access from this site um completely at all so um we removed that the other thing that was brought up was there was a small depression here in the front of uh this slot a and um we provided the ilsf calculations um to basically show that no storm water is generated from this site during the one-year storm and it's not um of a size that would meet the criteria so we I detailed both those criteria there in that letter we don't meet that as a Vernal as a ilsf rather um yeah and then as you said Mr chairman we did um receive a positive letter from the review consultant regarding our storm water and then we did receive a letter from the Department of fisheries and wildlife that said they do not consider this a take as designed here on the latest revised set of plans so with that I I believe we have all of the issues relative to conservation wrapped up and I was hoping to ask the the commission to close the hearing I'll add that you did provide us also a memo regarding the Vernal pool and you want to speak on that I don't know if that was discussed last meeting oh yeah we did we talked about it um and yeah so and and you were correct John that even though um our memo indicates that we did not find um enough indicators here to classify this as a certified Vernal pool there is still um you know there are indicators there that there's some veral pool like features so um we wouldn't mind you know even if it the the design has been revised to essentially treat this as a veral pool anyways what we've eliminated any discharges to it uh We've relocated the um driveway as far as possible away from it uh we're using bmps that are appropriate to be used um you know near that so in our mind you know if you want to treat it as a a potential Vernal pool for you know the future that's fine the way it's been designed accommodates that yeah I think one one of the concerns was that the examination of this area was not in the ideal time frame to determine truly whether it's a veral pool so veral pool investigations are performed from March until June um so if they performed the investigations during that time frame then they should be within the guidelines and criteria for um certifying veral pools uh per National Heritage is that correct so so even though it occurred kind of late when when did you do the evaluation I think it went into the first week of June it it was two dates April 19th and May 2nd so April and May right so April and May that's that's with well within that's in the middle of the Burnal pool season so majority of the egg masses or sort of indications that you're going to see are going to be in that time frame um you maybe see some juveniles um that are hatched uh in during that period as well depending on when the uh when the eggs were were laid but um yeah i' I'd say that you know from the indications of when you did the evaluation it looks like you were in within that time frame of of doing those evaluations so is this the um Evan is this the the set that we're approving and did you label that potential Vernal pool anywhere I did not add a label but if um to your priview we can add that to you know each one yeah because then it'll never match the order of conditions right we're looking at the order of conditions and it says there's a potential Vernal pool but yet it's not labeled on the plan so you got a major disconnect there so if you could please label it on the plans and then I guess it would be considered a uh just a PVP right okay yeah I mean if the order describes the potential Vernal pool as the Wetland you know from flag A1 to a such and such that's fine and um you know as a condition we can um add that label to to all the plans without without an issue that's fine I usually double provision in those if it's not um clearly labeled on the plan just so for the commission's benefit I do in include the the numbering of the flags uh for certain Wetlands um I guess the other other thing to uh make known to the commission is that this project will involve a substantial amount of Earth removal and I found out something that I didn't know is that uh within the zoning bylaw there are some Provisions for ensuring that the project uh meets the criteria being at least 50 ft away from a wetland um when they when they trigger the need for Earth Earth Earth removal permit so did not know that found out that uh the other day so that's interesting um and that is something that we need to uh potentially take into consideration as we move forward with understanding uh because that um is further restriction than what we allow for so so John what constitutes Earth removal in noron is certain that's that's a good question it's the amount kind of um I don't know Evan you want to touch upon that you probably have so much uh information yeah so in the town of Norton if you're going to uh remove more than 500 cubic yards of soil be it incidental to your um site or not um you're supposed to go to the planning board and obtain an earth removal permit um and then there's two types there's essentially um one for the purpose of you know building something like we are here and then there's another level where it's just for the purpose of you know generating um you know a resource yeah materials yeah so a lot of the stuff that they have in there and you can see like that's why we provided these cross-sections um because that was a requirement in the submitt requirements uh you know we have our test pits all that type of stuff um so it's I think a lot of it reads as if we were going to take a site and and basically make like a gravel pit and leave like what kind of Provisions are there obviously um you want to be more protective of the resource areas and things like that during those times um and then there's you know Bond where you have to make sure you reestablish ground cover etc etc um and to be honest with you I don't know if many people actually do apply for the Earth removal permit when they're going for it just like you know some single family house Lots or not um but our my client wanted to make sure that he you know had everything in place um you know to make sure we we went through the zoning by law and made sure we want to file for all the perment that needed yeah for how much are you removing um I'd have to look it up in the um just just yep I can get that it's in the other file that for uh planning so I believe my understanding it's 500 cubic yards for this type of development and then it's for a single family residential it be 50 cubic yards so just to kind of keep that in the back of your heads when we look at projects and we can um you know let let uh applicants know so John we should probably add that to our checklist to ask them to provide the amount of material yes and it's it's it's on our checklist on our on our online application form I did add it over there so if they are going to be rubman fill it's one of the questions now okay it's uh 22,000 yards approximately 22,000 so this site was previously used for gravel removal is that correct yes there was you this road that came in and when you look at the site I mean there's the Topography is severe you know we're going from here's elevation 90 to Elevation 65 in the Wetland but it's not just one constant slope it's it's all up and down you know there's ridges that run through it then there's holes so um it's it would be impossible to use the site without more or less smoothing it out or even the roog you can see here the existing topography where the house is about elevation 85 and the road is at 73 so it's that's all over the place all right so uh so as I understand it these these three hearings that we're taking as a group can be considered for closing tonight that's correct question yeah that's that's correct I think that's what's on the docket right now I know that just to kind of advise the commission is I believe lot a which is not currently within the conservation commission's purview uh may be um in discussions with the town at a later date I guess with the planning board um and the highway superintendent I guess they have some questions uh pertaining to that blind curve so I just wanted the commission to be aware of that that you know in in the event that for instance work was going to be done on that lot it would not have to basically coming back in front of us unless the alignment was going to be within 100 feet of the resource area which uh from my understanding is that's not potentially something that they're looking to do so um but if they do then they'll have to come back for a potential refiling so like can we just circle back one second to that construction exit so you can have 22,000 cubic yards that's a boatload of truck trips um what is the length of your construction exit because you have tremendous of tracking in this town so you're going to have a number of truck trips in and out of there so um probably going to have to Street sweep this one and what is the length of that exit I think we have it sh as 50 feet on the detail and what's the stone size on that uh 3 to 5 inch Cress Stone okay so a large still uh John Thomas I think we're going to have to add street sweeping as a condition I'm making a note in my notes right now we're adding street sweeping y I'm just say if it's it's yeah there is um that was a concern of the planning board as well you know because and in their requirements to apply you do need to so we did put it on the plan not to say that it shouldn't be a condition but I just want to let you know that we thought about it and it's in multiple places too so yeah that's that's not a really great that's not a great note that does not mention the word street sweeping what does it say clean spillage that's not a great directive to a contractor it should say Okay that was the note that was in the planning Woods uh that was directly from their thing but I I will add I will add a a special condition thank you um we did receive a question from one of the people in the audience um Lois Hanley asked a question did they figure out where they are entering from to complete the development because if they come in from Crane Street that is private APR land uh Lois they they are not pursuing that uh access uh from the APR land anymore that Evan uh noted that at the beginning of his uh presentation uh they'll be uh eliminating that access so if you have any other questions uh please let us know actually where is that entrance exit Evan be no I'm sorry the one that you are going to be using is it you going to use the driveway of we'll have to create some entrances so um yeah we're planning on using the driveway locations for the three houses um so we have an entrance here on Crane Street and then two off of Pine Street so again not to say we're going to show up and start hauling everything away it's going to take some work to create a suitable entrance and exit um so I I suspect that they're going to get there with some smaller equipment start building the access road start opening up uh some lay down areas Etc getting some equipment in and then it'll take some time but they'll develop um those those roadway entrances so one other thing obviously this is not our purview when it comes to Blind curves and uh traffic and things of that nature but people do fly by this road um so proper signage um you know when you guys are doing construction is probably something to think about if it's not mentioned at the planning board meeting you know you might need a detail officer too I don't know I'm just saying that you know at this location I mean it's just it's dangerous so those what brought up uh about the the signage um and you know trying to utilize this S as little as possible and like you said if we once we start breaking in we might need a detail to um start in the beginning to get things going before I know it's not our purview but we don't want any cars flying into that Wetland so I'm just saying you know that's how you can make a private perview I like that that's that's um all right so any further questions or discussion otherwise we can entertain a motions for to close uh the public hearing for these three files 250-1 52 53 and 54 so I think we should probably ask the public if they have other questions all right so actually actually Lois just said ask another question yeah you go go ahead if dirt that is coming out of lot a is that going to cause complication with the dangerous corner at that lot such as erosion at that part of the road um so I think she's talking about sediment tracking I think that's what she's talking about is that correct that's what I got from it um well let me reread this well it's a it's a little unclear whether she's concerned that um the entrance to lot a is so close to that dangerous curve that um you the blind curve that you know a slow moving truck may be a Target so that's that's where your signage is going to have to come into and I think that that's an important thing for the planning board to uh make sure they address because that's obviously outside our purview but like I I said if if cars end up you know entering in that well and then it does become our purview I I will just make it just maybe a little clear that you know I show an entrance on each one of the Lots but it's not uh necessary that the you know the material that's on lot a is going to be coming off of the entrance to lot a um it'll likely be you know they're going to find one entrance that's going to be better suited and it'll likely over the other two entrances and not everything just going over lot a um that'll probably be the least used entrance and then yes they'll have yep go is there any way to just get rid of the entrance to lot a so it's not so dangerous and just keep it well there will be an entrance to laot a you know for the construction of lot a and driveway she's talking for Construction Construction purpos removing Earth purposes which is totally different than constructing the house right so the initial phases of removing that Earth would it not make sense to just get rid of that entrance for a and then put the entrance in just when you're ready to build the house so that way you don't have three exits with potential tracking onto the public roadways yeah I I don't see that that way would actually be used for Trucking it's it's relatively steep so the other two are are flat and they're longer and they have better sight distance um but I I didn't want to not put a a close construction entrance there because there will be activity there for that house Etc so right but just for the house so let's separate the Earth removal from the house so I would suggest that that entrance only go in once they're ready to build that house but I guess I'm not in the planning board but uh I guess we do own that an exit right because it could have potential tracking and sediment into a wetland so that's my suggestion if we want to condition it all right so if there are no further questions from anyone uh we can consider a motion to [Music] close I'll make a motion to close the public hearing for files 25152 25153 and 25154 second we have a motion by Lisa seconded by T roll call vote beginning with Dan and Paxton I hi T and Mark hi hi and Lisa and Joe I obain all right and I'll thr in an eye so the motion carries so um Mr chairman before can I ask one quick question just as far as the next hearing um is there representation uh expected or just um are we gonna issue the order or what happens at the next meeting generally um we just deliberate on the order and vote VI next okay and so that you're your attendance is not required okay and that means meting is on the 24th of of June I I I just wanted to know I'm not going to be around so i r to make sure I could set somebody up to um come instead do you want me to send you over a draft of the order that I generate and uh so you can see it if you have any questions you can um I guess send it back for comment yeah yeah that'd be great thank you okay well have a great night everyone but but Evan I I I wager you've seen these things before yeah yeah yes right all right uh so our last continued public hearing is file number 250- 1052 waiting River States um and uh so we have a representative um I you'll have to refresh my memory as to the outstanding items we were discussing um as I understand we do have an upcoming site visit um on the 14th uh concerning the site but go ahead Mr dun yes sir Mr chairman Brian dun with MBL in development and permitting for the record with offices at five Bristol Drive in southeast and I'm the principal of the firm uh yes you are correct Mr chairman uh we do have a site visit uh scheduled for this Friday at 9:00 a.m. I have emailed um the conservation commission's office a stake out sheet showing uh the information that we staked out uh that was requested at the last hearing we did um so it was easier to see where the roadway was we also staked out the limits of the center line of the roadway so you could see that as well we staked out the erosion control limits that were requested as well as the Basin so uh and just to remind U members of the commission and and Mr Thomas you know we're asking for a plan Amendment which is really a a reduction in the length of of roadway reducing pavement increasing we're increasing open space um and we are still complying with the storm water rules and regulations and the TSS removal is required in the town as well as the D so uh we I think we do have a better project for the commission to you know vote for an amendment uh but I wanted to make sure that we were addressing all of those concerns and showing you everything on the site uh as well as uh it was uh we did get a couple of uh prices for peer review it is my understanding that our client has submitted a check and authorization for one of them I can't remember which one it was maybe John can tell us uh who's going to be looking at this uh revised set of plans was that today no when was that um as far as I know uh they sent out a check to you guys last week is what they told me I didn't receive anything did they email us uh requesting which uh peer-reviewer because we don't have any correspondents okay so then I will follow up with our my client tomorrow morning yeah and but it was my understanding that they they chose one and sent a check into the town okay I'll keep an eye out and um maybe they sent it in with a copy of The Proposal so that hopefully it has that name on it okay all right any questions from uh commission members or for that matter anyone else um I had something come up work-wise on Friday and I can't make it it's going to be too tight so I'm hoping somebody else is going to be able to walk it as well Friday so I guess the question is uh who is available Friday at 9:00 am since we're all here as well last question I expect to be there I I just need to know the nearest house number so that I can go to the appropriate location because this this is clearly I it's not obvious exactly where this spot is is that uh yeah it's adjacent to 108 so the proposed roadway if you're facing number 108 would be to the left of the driveway to 108 uh but I I do want to commiss I do want to caution the commission members this is not going to be an easy sidewalk it's very very thick so I should bring my yeah well I have one Julie and you can borrow mine I'm planning on bring I'm planning on bringing a machete uh so hopefully we can find everything that the survey is Stak out for us well my understanding is that the surveyor probably cut some great line that we can walk through so well I'm hoping they I'm hoping that they did uh John you weren't at the last meeting I mean I know I met with you and we went over kind of you know a while ago what the changes were going to be but you know the commission members you know rely heavily on you so did did you have any comments on what we've submitted so far as revised plans I mean I saw what you've submitted um and you know most most of these Redevelopment kind of or Amendment projects that are prior to my um tenure here with the town um those decisions that were made previously with the um permits I I usually let those be um with this project I mean obviously I look at it as a clean slate um just want to make sure that the storm water is good and uh you know if the commission members are interested in seeing the site um you know this is on the docket for a long time um and you know just kind of see a lot of these sites these larger sites uh and see if they're interested in seeing exactly um you know what things look like before and kind of during and then after construction kind of thing yeah understood and the commission may remember we went through an extensive peer review with your consultant at the time John cheshier who has uh you know various varied opinions on certain things um but we addressed all of his comments to ensure the commission was happy with their Consultants review as well as us performing and addressing his comments so so I don't I I would not expect anything different this time right and I think it's it's understandable that if a project meets all the performance standards of the storm water and Wetland protection act I don't see foresee it being an issue um it's just going through this the standards and making sure that they meet you know the specifications that are outlined um as it pertains to the commission uh we've got a fair number of new members who were not here um when that first project went through so I think it's good for them to get an understanding of what they're looking at and kind of get a better understanding as to kind of the projects from in infancy infancy stage to uh final construction understood okay so uh I guess the question to the Mr chairman and members of the commission is do we have enough people that can do the site work walk on Friday or do we need to reschedule it I unfortunately also lik Le to have a conflict that won't allow me to go um but I would like to be there but I I think if there are other members that can make it um that they shouldn't yeah I'm I'm unavailable on Friday okay so this this if I may Mr chairman um we uh emailed you the stake out sheet as you know um once we submit a application to your commission you have the ability to access a site at any time and walk the site on your own um whether you're by yourself or as a group so um with that I would like to make sure that you have the that you understand you do have the ability to do that at any time as well as Mr Thomas and and take a walk through the site and see things as we've Stak them out if you need or someone from my office to meet you there we can do that as well yeah well as of now I I do have availability on on Friday morning and I expect I will be walking the site and John I assume you will be as well so after that if there are other members that want to walk the site I will be glad to walk it with them at the time that they're available so I I think we're going to be able to address walking the site and and seeing what's St staked out uh adequately and then we'll bring it back to the meeting next time discuss it and then I'm assuming we can vote on the amendment perfect okay so uh we'll be meeting right now at nine o'clock on Friday and continuing until what the 24th the 24th is our next meeting correct okay so any further questions otherwise we can continue and then do the site walk and revisit this on the 24th I'll make a motion to continue the public hearing for file 250-1 one z uh sorry 1052 second second uh I think Paxton Beacher there so it's a motion by Lisa seconded by Paxton um Lisa and Mark how do you vote hi hi Joe and Paxton hi hi and uh Dan and T hi hi and I'll throw in and I so Mr dun we will uh talk to you again on the 24th okay and I'll see you on Friday morning uh if you're going to be there yes I will okay thank you so much everybody appreciate it thanks for coming in okay you're very welcome I'll see you Friday all right our next item on the agenda this completes our continued public hearings we are now on the um section of requesting certifica of compliances or extensions the um these are all fairly low numbers 250- 543 94 North w Street uh I might have had a memory of it but how long how long ago was that John quite some time ago and I'm assuming we can definitely issue a certificate of compliance everything looks like it's natural out there so yes looking for a motion on a full certificate of compliance on file number 250- 543 mik motion I me yeah thank you motion by Lisa seconded by Mark uh Lisa and Joe hi obain Mark and Paxton hi I and T and Dan hi and I'll thr an i as well so we have I think six I and one obst next item is file number 250- 585 U and I do recall This concerns uh the old honey Dom not U uh order of conditions uh and I think the the date was 2004 on that so um this is the nested egg inside the current want this was the project that was not pursued so they never they never pursued uh the renovations and Redevelopment of the parcel per this permit um so since no work was done to that plan uh we can the commission can uh acknowledge that and issue that no work to the plan was done as part of the COC all right all right I'll make a motion to issue of full certificate of compliance for file 250- 585 second we have a motion by Lisa Second Joe uh and Dan and Lisa vote hi hi Mark and Joe hi I and Tom and Paxton hi hi and I'll through and I and then we have I'm kind of wondering this must be a typo um 250- 22 a is it or is it 228 no it's 22 it's 22A it's really 22A yeah um okay uh and what does it relate to relates to an enforcement order that was um by my predecessor um for for um disturbance within the riverfront over near the goat City Pub oh yes okay yes I I looked at that map it's the U yeah there's a big um building there that Abed right up smack dab against the Wetland um and they removed some material so it is um all planted and in compliance now is that your assessment John the area that they have on the plan those plantings are in um from my understanding is that the area was infested with Autumn Olive previously and that for instance they should keep up with the management of the autum olive as they move forward with the property um this whole entire COC request is at the um the reason for it is because the property is going through an exchange and they are looking to close out any past permits and the potential buyer understands the provisions that they're going to be tasked with moving forward and that's why for instance I wanted to ensure that we put in the conditions uh for the uh invasive species management monitoring uh and management of the property as it moves forward all right so that'll be that language will be included in the CC yes so uh I'll make a motion to issue is it I guess it's a full COC in release of an enforcement order correct for 250- 22A second so we have a motion by Lisa seconded by Joe Lisa and Dan how do you vote I I Mark and Joe I I tomama and Paxton I I and I'll throw in an ey so motion carries uh we are now at um 300 South Washington Street we have a uh order of conditions um which are in the standard format uh nothing really exciting or complicated questions revisions motions I thought it looked fine I will make a motion to issue the order of conditions for file 250-15 as written second motion by Lisa seconded by Mark uh Lisa and Dan had any vote hi hi Mark and Joe hi hi Tom and Paxton hi hi and I'll throw in an eye um we are now at the draft minutes of 520 um have a couple questions on this um they're kind of at the back um anybody have anything before that so we had 300 South Washington Street was a motion to continue which we just dealt with and then we had 61 West Main Street so I I don't have page numbers but this is uh kind of the last two pages and then we had 60r which was a motion to continue um then we get to 300 South Worcester Street and I thought we issued an a an order of conditions for them 360 South Wister Street does that you're right I just copi and paste it incorrectly so this is all right so this just needs to be oh I see yes all right so we do have the section with the order of conditions and so you just need to um correct the motion to continue uh and then the same with 18 Country Club Club away and then we reviewed the U the draft minutes so it's just those two is that right Megan yes any further comments questions I don't have any U comments about oh go ahead go ahead Lisa well no I was going to make a motion to approve them but do you have a comment on let's do that let's that's all right let's do that all right I'm in all I'll make motion to um approve the draft minutes 52024 uh as with edits as discussed second uh so we have motion by Lisa second by Paxton Lisa and Dan by all Joe and Mark hi hi T and Paxton hi and I'll throw in an i the motion carries we're at Old business news business Rose farm update yeah yeah sure so I drafted up some information for the board to take in I guess for an understanding of how the process uh went for this lease agreement um just need uh the commission um to kind of initiate this whole process I have a lease agreement if you're interested in seeing it um you know I can send it over to you but the procurement officer for the town the town manager uh has sent it through legal councel and they're comfortable with police language and everything um and it's really out of my hands when it comes to that kind of stuff I just went on the agricultural website and kind of put something together on paper um I sat down with the leasi and the town manager and we kind of hashed things out um to kind of get through a lease agreement so we collaborative uh put something together um and we have come to an agreement um and formally just need basically the commission's blessing to initiate this and I talked to Julian about it I showed him the lease agreement and everything so um but if if anyone has any questions uh the Le C is basically looking to initiate um operations as soon as possible um and so far we've kind of made preparations to make um it um um I guess okay for him to start uh doing the work so uh he's made some preparations ahead of the game but um as such he has um done a great job with kind of maintaining the property we had it managed and and cleared so uh it looks good um we're just waiting basically get to go ahead so uh we need a a formal vote I think I think it would be appropriate to get a formal vote so yeah can can I just make um two suggestions on it uh and I lost my spot hold on a second there was one minor typo and then one change um that I'm having a hard time finding but the first one was on the first uh number R numeral one number one the owner shall arrange to assist the Le SE should be two obtain a public water supply tap um and then the so that's minor the there was a section in here that said something to the effect of um that the lesie is permitted to grow vegetables flowers or something I I I again I'm having a hard time finding that section I'll let you know when I find it but I was going to propose we say something a little B more broad to say you know agricultural activities just so that they're not I I I couldn't foresee in a a case where this would come up but I just envisioned you know wanting to engage in some activity that still Falls within agricultural activity doesn't neatly fit within those specific words that were used um so I don't want them to be boxed ingling to find that section right down no and I I understand it and just so that the commission understands this is that um the lease agreement is written in a way where um it's a tenure of a fiveyear period and then he has the or they have the option to basically uh renew the lease uh for another five years and then renew it another for another five years so um that was the terms that were recommended and that language was from the le as to kind of what he envisions or they Envision um putting in there so just Incorporated it that way um but you know we're not really locking obviously if if the terms of this agreement were to uh default then I would say that we could definitely for the next lease agreement make it more broad um but those terms were discussed and they were hashed out um with the Lei and the procurement officer didn't seem to have an issue with it so okay so there would be natural opportunity to reward that in five years or in five years probably L time if they really wanted to but yeah and and if if they want if say for instance uh the Lei decided that this was not something they wanted to pursue anymore the next potential opportunist LEC would be able to revise that agreement to their to their liking as long as it met our standards for what we want to have there for agricultural purposes so so Mark what what are you thinking that would not fit in the vegetables or flowers that's that's what I was struggling to think of I just I when I read it my my first thought was that it was so specific that I I worried it it could hinder the ability to do something that didn't neatly fall in that so I don't know if if they wanted to have a small chicken Coupe and and you know raise sell eggs or something like that it wouldn't fit within that definition the the activities that were proposed there um and and I guess to to be fair would the commission be okay with that being an activity on the property it's you know it's not just my call but I was more comfortable with something a little bit more broad than what whatever that section said a good point there's there's a lot more um that's invested when you talk about husbandry and things of that nature and and I think the the Lei that is taking this opportunity on is not uh pursuing that um as part of their operations um but I do agree in the future you know obviously we can think about that um for for potential other leasy opportunities uh if if this one um you know defaults or or doesn't um want to pursue uh the property any further I think that could definitely be something that you know could be an option for the commission to consider with with altering or um I guess changing okay and and for the record it was of course right at the top it's under letter B where it says uh for growing fruit flowers and vegetables again that seemed to be broad enough to to cover the activities that he was uh the lesie is proposing here but I don't know again a little beehive or something would that be it seems like we we' probably be okay with that but it wouldn't fit within those those uh that language so that's why I was just proposing something more broad yeah it um I I I don't know I I I don't think uh beehive would be an objection but I asse em what about em I think Norton used to have an Emu Farm I don't think they're in business anymore um uh yeah I mean I assume Rose farm was part of a dairy farm at one point um but anyone who wants to go into Dairy and this terrain without without the kind of uh support I mean they would have to do dairy and make cheese and all kinds of specialty things it it'd be a tough thing to start up from from scratch but uh but that's I I think if things go well uh and it's potential for expanding the operation in five years that would be a great discussion so so John wouldn't we um entertain a motion Once the lease agreements accepted by Town Council this otherwise what are we voting on I mean I I just I just want you to accept the elase agreement um for the pursuance of um initiating we can't accept it if it isn't written yet right no it's written it's written no it's written but it says it's not been it's under advisement it isn't legal still looking at it well I think part of the part part of the advisement is the commission has to vote on it just as we vote on the the reservoir kayak agreement yes okay so the motion should uh yes I'm going to make a motion then that we um uh I don't know how to word this that we are um in agreement or we we approve we approved the lease the lease hasn't been drafted well it's been drafted but hasn't been approved yet so we can't approve something that hasn't been to Legal yet that's my point no no no legal it has been through legal legal was reviewed under advisement through legal so they looked through it they made sure that the language within the lease agreement was adequate for the town and that's what I'm that's what I'm trying to say there is that they they're not the ones that are going to approve the Le the the the Le agreement but they're going to take it under Enis and review it make sure it's within Conformity to what they would want the town to basically pursue so it's correct in every sort of legal term for administering so I don't know how to word it any better than that but they're they're okay with it okay so this the board the select board will end up signing it similar to the oh uh who else I think I think we signed it we signed we sign the kayak yeah right so what I would what what what I would ask the commission is through the chair to be able to sign on behalf of the commission and the the members just vote that the chair is able that way I don't think get everybody's W winning sign signature is just give me the authorization or to talk to Julian about having sign it for everybody else here on the commission does that make sense yeah so the first motion is to I guess that we're in agreement with the lease agreement uh if you approve the lease agreement yeah I I think just authorize this the signing of the lease agreement well yeah then there's the second the second part of that is is to um that Julian has signatory authorities that's the I guess the second part of the I think you combine those yeah it was it was one okay we have a motion we just need a second second okay uh so motion by Lisa second by Dan uh Lisa and Paxton How do you vote hi hi and Mark and uh Dan hi hi and T I I'll vote an i and I think we'll register um Joe as a uh abstention or a recusal one and the other yeah either way abstention all right so uh the next item bylaw so I just wanted to inform the commission that the um the zoning the zoning uh Planning and Zoning is is going to be revising their uh bylaw um coming up within the next year um they've circulated some uh information through um Mark babowski he's a known gentleman here in the uh Massachusetts he's revised a lot of uh I guess zoning bylaws here in Massachusetts so he's uh they got a grant to help with the um rewriting and codification of the bylaw so there's some uh questions and um things that I've been asking for as it pertains to um our purview um but it's not in a working order uh for me to comment any further uh so I'm going to wait till a you know 90% draft is complete and then probably circulate it to the commission uh for comments uh see if they have any as it pertains to I guess how it affects us um but I'm going to be working and if anyone from the commission uh would like to be a little bit more involved in that process please let me know um and we can just work together um and I wanted to also inform the commission that the water bodies commission is resurfacing no pun intended um and uh we're going to be looking for a uh Conservation Commission floating member so if anyone is interested um in joining as a floating member the uh waterbodies committee let me know um and then also discussion of our conservation bylaw if that is something that the commission wants to pursue um I need a small committee um to work on that uh the plan would potentially have something draft in order um for next spring so if uh I don't know you guys want to discuss them all at once I guess well um I still have PTSD from our last attempt but that's that's I just I I just I just don't think it's politically feasible and um you know I I think that the we on protection act and the storm water regulations really do protect the interest of the H waterer which is the the key issue um so I guess the the question that I'm going to propose is that do we want to wait until the new storm water water regulations come out to see kind of how those fit um for us as well because I think they're going to be a little bit more restrictive with single family residential as we move forward as well um I mean I don't know you know having liid improvements for each site I mean that's a positive it's going to help us all out um but you know it's also a discussion item that I want to make sure I mean I need I just need U feedback from the commission I mean we got a full board tonight so this is great um but if this is something that the commission you know feels we could secure and kind of potentially you know move forward great I'll work on it and I'll work with a small committee and and we'll do it but if you think it's basically um a lost cause then I won't pursue it and I will look at you know doing other things here in town um that could potentially benefit us as well so I just need some feedback um on how to I guess itemize and kind of distribute my time as we move forward so well yeah looking for feedback I mean I think getting a whole structur bylaw through town meeting is an extraordinarily difficult thing I think there are many in town who who say it's it's regulatory overreach and that kills it but I think one alternative is if we can uh draft a remodeling or new home construction handbook to address some of the interests such as suggest that people consider ground infiltrating um runoff structures uh even if it's a even if it's a swell that retains rainwater and we may get better uh well compliance isn't the right word but uh better traction in terms of people understanding that you know you can't just dump water on your neighbor and we want to purify and retain groundwater and things like that so I I think as an information sheet we're more likely to get more compliance than trying to get something through town hall a town meeting I think enough time although I still have I still have H PTSD as well I think enough time has passed and I think there's been enough development pressure the we have more Butters coming out to to to public hearings and I personally think they may be more vable and I'm not looking at you know to me the important thing is not storm water because the state's taking care of that the state is taking care of that ad nauseum it's coming down to to me in me in my viewpoint is the um the uh increasing the width of the no touch zone no disturb Zone which almost every other commission has um as well as uh affording more protection for vernal pools and isolated land such to flooding so to me those are the important things where the Gap is definitely in the Wetland protection act and I think you know I think those are manageable chunks for people um and I I think they may be more amendable to what seeing the amount of development in this town right now well I think if you restricted it to new development you would be more likely to get it past oh yes yes yes yes absolutely um May maybe the the best thing for me and something that couldn't hurt is I think John you said you were G to you're going to post in the Google Drive uh so I I guess what we would do is um bylaw and use that as a as a template and just rewrite it um I mean somebody like me needs to have something before him I can't I wouldn't be able to just make something up out of my head um even if I looked I suppose at other at the other bylaws of other towns but um well maybe I don't know I um I'm I'm Freer in a in about a week and a half um and uh I would I'd like to take a look at it again if our I mean if if you have a digital copy of our old bylaw would that does does does it sound reasonable that that could be looked at as sort of a template I mean to be Rewritten I'm seeing unstable network connection am I dks are unstable these days yeah You' you've been going in and out but it's okay okay um so what I can do is I I said that I have a simplified bylaw which I went through and I kind of uh took some of the more intensive stuff out of uh to make it more generalized uh to start and then for instance we can add stuff to it um and obviously comments comments and and feedback from the commission is going to be vital in this whole kind of process if we were going to do it um it's just you know stripping it and then adding stuff that we think is important like Lisa said you know Vernal pool protection um ice was it we said isolated land sub of flooding um and you know just and the increase increase to the no dist no disturb Zone I think those are three things that we could definitely highlight you know in a simplified bylaw and I don't think and and then stressing new development constraints uh you know making it more you know towards that I think you know the general public will see that as an overall Improvement um you know what we currently have you know kind of what I was indicating um with the Earth disturbance this evening was the planning board has more protection and more sensitivity when there's an earth disturbance project than we do um and I find that kind of you know inconsistent and you know that's been like that since the 70s when the when the PW was put in place so you know the challenge that I have is you know I just want to make things more consistent and and you know make it so that way the commission has the utmost you know Authority when it comes to the protection of wetlands you know no other agency should have that kind of in there um as as a standard we should be the ones that are administering that we should be the ones that are enforcing it um you know and the policies are great I will say they they definitely do and the guidance documents are great but the challenge is that it's not enforcable and that's where I struggle is that you know someone says oh somebody did some work you know within 25 ft okay you know they should have probably done a filed for a permit um oh they cut some vegetation you know it's like it's just you know we need to make a little bit so that way I have a little bit more flexibility when it comes to enforcement policies because unfortunately I have a lot of um standards and performance things that I have to go by from the act and I don't have enough um enforcement kind of action that I can take towards things and you know if if we want to make sure that people aren't doing stuff correctly I need to be able to have that as a safeguard uh and just basically provide people in the future um for the enforcement enforcement Recons so so I I I think it was discussed that you know Dan you and Paxton might be the Thea on for this you know spearheaded committee so Dan you said you have availability in the next week and a half so let's uh in a week and a half yes okay so in a week and a half so let let's let's reconvene um obviously you know hopefully by the next meeting we'll have kind of a update to provide the commission as to kind of whether we looked at the draft and what you guys think and then maybe we can you know have a presentation I don't know Paxton how are your how are your PowerPoint skills I can I can do Powerpoints as similar to Dan you know obviously a little bit more challenges when it comes to envisioning something and putting it on paper but um in terms of actually right BW but I want to be involved I can you know PowerPoint skills are probably pretty good um but yeah I happy to also get involved and I think just having something um is is is a start even if they weren't to actually move uh very far in the town um John can can you do this can you send out both your new newer streamlined version and whatever the uh I will I will send you both versions the one the one that got denied by the town and the one that I've kind of gutted um and I will do that both and I guess as we're talking H Joe Tama Mark H what are your thoughts I want I want to hear Fe feedback from everybody I want everybody's input I don't know I guess I'm a bit more pessimistic about chances of something like this just with past votes on other issues in the Tex I think I shared the last time that we had this conversation to me the default answer for a lot of things uh proposed is always no so you have to sell it as what's in it for me uh for people to be flipped to a yes so I don't know you know we maybe we should have a town meeting that everybody attends before the other town meeting where they just get out of all their frustrations and everything they're mad about then when they and then have the town meeting the next day uh just thinking out loud yeah I all I can say for myself is that this is not like on a personal level this is not my priority for for Town stuff that I'm that I'm dealing with I got there's some other stuff that I think you know a maybe after the special election I could think about it more about what it would what it would look like or what I could even devote for time to to help with any of it but I guess the question is do you think that it would be a good thing to pursue I guess that's the that's the question that I have yeah I mean I of course I yeah I think we we should but I just I personally don't have the bandwidth or energy for it probably until at least the fall yeah but bear in mind the last time this was presented we never got to the part where the details of what was being proposed were even discussed there was this uh you know fellow who owned at the time uh blue view nurseries who was a skilled speaker uh he doesn't what's that Anthony K he still owns blue view yeah but he lives outside of town so meeting had to give him permission to speak and then it was you know he did all those things that a good political speaker does and of course it was tank this invasion of our life and so you know you spend a lot of time um uh putting together a well thought out and logical thing and then this fellow is going to come on back and and make it impossible so Julian you raised uh that that's an excellent point and I would make the exact same point that without a strong bylaw people can just do whatever the hell they want in town and you can have we will have all these people invading our town and and building into the Wetland and to me that's an invasion a few weeks back few a few meetings back the gentleman said uh I I I guess it was somebody on Reservoir Street he said you're not going to get anything built at all and I said why is that a bad thing um uh really I to me the invasion is is uh people coming building new things in our town that are just taking up the uh the space and the wetlands and cutting down the trees um that's a much more meaningful Invasion than uh uh saying that you can't build uh you know within 50 feet of a a wetland you can't nobody's feeling we you know the well the well production yeah I know I'm talking about the the no disturb Zone you know so Joe Joe any anything you want to add I guess to this discussion absolutely I I you know my pure belief on this is if we're going to approach it to any way before town meeting maybe we pick two three four five things at the most keep it very simple keep it vague once we get a buy law we can start to add to it if we bombard anyone with anything that's offensive we're coin be up against a battle that will be like before so I think we have to pick a few key items and focus on them and even if we don't have to put a ton of time in if they shoot that down we we didn't kill ourselves developing another huge plan that's going to go nowwhere if we get two three four five items in then the next meeting we add one or two and I think that that will help make it simpler we won't overload people who don't understand what we're asking for and you know the the tides don't get turned that fast that way by so much out input from people who aren't focused on what we're focused on John can we keep it uh very general in terms of the bylaw because the bylaw lets you promulgate regulations right yep that's correct and that's the next Port that I was going to get to yes so the bylaw just allows allows the commission to come up with regulations to enforce so how General can keep the bylaw I can keep it very skeleton and then we can just add some language saying that within a year the commission will Pro promulgate regulations which will administer you know whatever we want to administer um but I think I think that's the part that makes that makes me a little uneasy MH simply because you know we're an all volunteer group and we're not accountable to voters you know we don't represent any particular folks in town so I guess you know I'd want to take a good look at that to say we don't want to have unlimited Authority again because we're we're not an elected group here so I guess well the town yeah but if the town agrees to it then we have it so I I will I will say that if if when we do do this is that my plan would be to look at the most generalized bylaw and the most generalized regulations and use that as a base and then look at other towns which are within Arms Reach of us and see what their bylaw and regulations are and if I was going to present this at town meeting I would show the public what other towns are doing which are way more restrictive than us and how this is not very restrictive it just AIDS us with any sort of appeal case through D and that's it can I just ask one thing John if if everything you know say we're you know in in a year from now and it's passed and all that stuff how how are you going to be able to enforce anything with the staff and what you have available to you for resources I don't think it's about enforcement it's planning so for instance people aren't coming to us up to the 20 foot anymore it's a planning exercise they're going to respect to 50 it's nothing more that John has to do it's when they when they don't when they don't follow the rules or they after the fact let's say someone gets a permit and they decide to clearcut an area which on their plan they know they shouldn't be doing but they do it's same thing that we have here currently is that you know if they wanted to get a COC well you can't because you got to do mitigation for that and that's part of the job that's part of the requirements I'm I'm tasked with doing that's why I get you know paid to to work on your behalf is you know I I I do the work for the town under the Conservation Commission so it's part of my job description um okay all right no that's good I thought I thought it would require more oversight from you no so if so what I'm hearing from the commission is that the thought process is is to generate a very um non complex very basic uh bylaw General and do you want me to work on prating some regulations as a draft or do we want to hold off on that for right now I think we should hold up on that let's get the bylaw passed first and because I think we know where we're going with the rigs which is again not going to be any more than like Joe said you know I can I can only think of three or four things on my wish list there I'm in agreement with you Lisa on those three things yeah so all right so I will work on drafting something up for the subcommittee that is Dan and Paxton and we will collaborate and have potentially something on the books for the next meeting does that seem reasonable guys it seems reasonable okay so we will put together something um for review and discuss at the next meeting and that's all I have this evening I just have a very quick kind of operations question question for those who've been on the board or just more familiar um to vote you know opposed for a project um like a COC um based on the basis that you know even if it meets regulations but it might not necessarily align with just the reality of you know what we see in the town and and um and what measures might be needed there really is no power I guess right on the conservation end you know even if it were denied because it could then be appealed to M and then approved right that's the correct process but it but the the ability and the power to obviously oppose is still there I just wanted to been opposed yet I'm I'm just curious you know how that works and any thoughts behind it let me let me comment on that so the Wetland prot ction act which is when I came involved with this uh not I mean we don't want to talk about that story but it was a state law that was passed with the requirement that a it would be locally admin um so volunteers would staff a commission locally but your role was to administer the law so in spite of your uh preference for you know reducing the density of of um development and so on those things can't really enter into your decision um to approve or disapprove if the project is according to the requirements of the Wetland protection act as an objective volunteer you need to approve the project because as you point out if everyone decides I don't like that project even though it's consistent with the law the applicant just appeals and if it's consistent with the law then it gets approved at the next level up so I would so what you're saying is and I do know the well and protection act is basically what we're um yeah promoting and and trying to enforce as volunteers but nothing beyond that even like on a Town level like what you know interpretation on the town level yeah but see that's where a local bylaw comes in um and if you can convince the town that is it is in the best interest of the town to have bylaw requirements that are perhaps more stringent than the protection act um yeah then then you have a basis a legislative basis or a legal basis in which to enforce a more restrictive requirement thank you the danger Paxton just quickly is if somebody appeals to d d has um three three Avenues okay so they can issue a superseding order and they can throw out all of our conditions that we wrote so hard that are local that we like to see and they can just uphold their own and they're mostly just blanket crappy just there's like six six conditions and that's it that's it they can so they can throw ours out they can adopt their own or they can uphold both and they usually just adopt their own because it's the easiest way out so that's the danger is that they don't have the local you know knowledge where we add very specific conditions about a site they'll just throw it out that's the the danger you lose control that's good to good to know yeah you're hard pressed to deny something and we shouldn't be denying something that meets the ACT is the bottom line we might not like it yeah no that's kind of what I yeah yeah and and I think if you if you want to pursue policy that change the way a town can be developed um I think that's um would that be planning primarily but even there you know what you can do within a town um has to be approved at the state level as well you can't just decide you know nobody else can build a house in this town uh that's oh that sounds nice yeah well it's not consistent with the state constitution so you can't do that yeah the revisions to the zone bylaw as I referenced earlier will have to go for State review so they will go through that process and you know but like I said you know this will be something that I'll work on um and I will have something ready for the next time we meet hopefully for the board to take a look at and like I said I'll try to make it as simple as possible um and and least his point there I mean the reason why to have a bylaw is in the event that we do have an appeal um you know the state doesn't have the authority to instill the six conditions that they instill they still have to Bas basically go through our provisions and our conditions and we just want to make sure to be able to have you know control of um projects if they were going to go through an appeal process we haven't had that happen um yet but you know it will happen eventually and I I just want to make sure that we're prepared um for that as we move forward so um that's all I have tonight so uh I'll throw out a motion to adjourn if everybody's good with that I can add one quick thing that's totally unrelated I had an opportunity to have um Megan's husband John's food from his new food truck it was delicious and I'll be a regular customer there encour where is it so for Scott Drive um and Megan he is he is open what 11 to 11 to 6 on Saturdays what's the name of it fat Johnny Burgers and bites all right I can look it up I had a burger and a hot dog and they were both great so compliments the show thank you he's very happy about it my son had a slider and a piece of grilled cheese so he enjoyed it very much all right oh do we need a second uh unfortunately all right I'll start it good night all all right good night everybody good night everybody good night