now 6:30 and we will open the meeting as we usually must uh reading the Preamble concerning that this is a remote meeting so Dan uh go ahead with that please pursuant to Governor Healey's March 29th 2023 Bill extending several covid era policies and programs by allowing virtual meetings to continue from March 31st 20 23 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 and or parties with a right and or requirement to attend this meeting can be found at the end of this agenda members of the public attend this public hearing SL 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 star n 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 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 report uh excuse me record of proceedings as soon as possible after the meeting thank you Dan um our director uh John Thomas is not able to attend tonight but we have our assistant Megan her up involved with the meeting uh members of the commission participating are myself Julian Cades chair Lisa coroa Vice chair uh Dan uh Pearson uh you are not the treasurer you are the the the wi the Quarter Master CL I guess cler that's it that's it um and Joe carallo uh Mark Fernandez and Tom ofest I think Paxton Hall Show is not able to attend tonight either um so we have a fairly short agenda tonight uh we have no new public hearings uh the only continued public hearing is file number uh 250-10 52 waiting River uh Estates that was a request for an amendment of its order of conditions uh concerning a reduction in the footprint of the um development plan and as I recall the only items had to do with uh discussions back and forth with the applicant in the peer review concerning storm waterer uh design and uh as I understand it that has been negotiated and resolved so do we have a u representative who just wants to review that briefly yes sir Mr chairman Brian dun I'm the principal of the firm MBL Land Development and permitting for the rec at our offic is at five Bristol Drive in southeast in Massachusetts and I'm here on behalf the uh owner and applicant Scott and Joan stormo and as you just previously stated Mr chairman yes we did have a a peer review uh by Pat Brennan who went through our storm water and site plans had a few comments uh very minor in nature uh We've addressed those comments and then uh while we were doing that information and uh making those changes as requested by Mr Brennan we also met with the planning board uh once and they had some minor uh requests of changes to the parking so we added some visitor parking spaces uh near the end of the culdesac and right before the culdesac so that there would be some additional parking if visitors had come to the to the site during special occasions so we've we've done that we've updated our drainage design associated with that we've got a clean bill bill of health uh from the peer review consultant and we're here asking you to close the public hearing and issue an amendment to the order of conditions Mr chairman all right thank you so do we have any questions um before we consider uh well we'll talk about closing but any question from members of the commission about this project and for that matter any questions from members of the audience um and um if none the the only hesitation about closing is it is exactly 21 days from now till our next meeting and uh there is concern that there may not be enough time to get the orders of conditions in your hands in that window so what we would request is that you agree to a continuation until August 12th um that it really won't change anything with regard to procedure we will just close on that day having reviewed um the order of conditions which will be available to us at that time so I think we're we're okay with that Mr chairman I think that uh we might need to uh send you an email uh waving that 21 days and allowing you to issue on the 12th I think I think that we need to do that for the well and protection acts well I'll send an email to John not if we continue to hear it so if we continue it we don't need to take that you're correct absolutely so we just continuing to August 12 and you're goingon to issue on 12 on August 12th uh yeah there I mean there's there's no um uh barrier to us having reviewed and then we'll vote on it and then it would be issued the next day that's that's that's the uh the wrinkle is that just the reality of of getting the office stuff processed would require 22 days instead of 21 that's why understood I'm not but I don't have a problem with that Mr chairman okay all right so if there are no questions or comments from anyone in the meeting we can entertain a motion to uh close not to close to continue uh this this uh hearing for um file number 250 52 until August 12th so second um oh that was a midd second one I think Lisa obviously made the motion and and Dan did you uh did you get that second I I don't know I sure I think cavalo uh okay well we'll go with then so uh roll call vote starting with Joe and Tama hi well we saw I think we saw an eye coming from you Tama you're you're on mute at the moment but uh that's all right um and Dan and Mark hi hi and Lisa hi and El and hi okay so the motion cares so I I don't think you really have to be involved uh Brian on the on the 12th this is just a procedural issue excellent thank you very much Mr chairman and also um just wanted to uh personally apologize for not being on the last meeting I was uh on vacation with my family and I had come back that day and had forgotten that we had to get on a call so my apologies to this commission Mr chairman well uh I think we survived and you're allowed to take vations thank you okay thank you everybody appreciate your uh involvement and your time and effort on this on uh this amendment to the order of conditions thank you again very good have a great night everybody a year back so we're now up to request for certificates of compliance uh this one concerns U file number [Music] 250-4764 um and I'm not certain what triggered the need to um at the CLC but um it's my understanding that there's another project that requires a u an application uh and this needs to be closed out and it's noted that all of the work on the original uh order of conditions is complete so I think we can consider a motion to issue a complete coc for file number 25047 I'll make a motion to issue a full certificate compliance second I tell you you timing for the second um I couldn't tell was it we'll give it to mark this time so uh made a motion by Lisa uh second by Mark Lisa and Joe how do you vote hi I I think we got two eyes and T and Dan hi hi and Mark I and I'll throw in an i motion carries uh the certific the C certificate of compliance is approved um next up we have uh orders of conditions for 61 Oak Street file number 250- 1159 and that had to do with [Music] um a installation of a detached garage uh and some uh unpermitted work which I think U is probably wrapped up in the in the order but uh see1 Oak Street so uh nothing stood out to me um we have the findings that relate specifically to to the project um and our standard special conditions any any questions or comment about um this set of orders of conditions y look straightforward to so I will make a motion to accept the draft order of conditions for file 250-1155 n that's it motion by Lisa and I think that was a second by Joe is that right yes okay so Lisa and Joe how do you vote hi hi T and Dan hi hi and Mark hi and I'll throw in an ey so the motion carries we've accepted the draft of the order of conditions that was submitted for 61 Oak Street file number 250- [Music] 759 next up on our agenda is set of conditions for file number 250- 1158 concerning 129 King philli Road uh and again um findings are straightforward special conditions which are standard conditions are unremarkable any questions comments I'll make a motion to um issue the order of conditions for file 250-1 one58 as written second a motion by Lisa seconded by T Joe and Lisa how do you vote i i t and Dan hi hi Mark hi and I'll feel an i the motion carries um we have gra minutes I found nothing concerning remarkable anybody have any comments about the minutes of Monday July 8th uh I just have a minor one unfortunately I don't have the minutes right in front of me but it's with um D40 um towards the end of the uh the Blue Notes on it it says uh something about the area being 15 feet away and I don't know we might just say something like the well if if you think this is right the delineation or something like that well I can I can read that um it says it's it looks like it's the last uh line Fernandez asked some questions about the limit of work and the sediment controls Holmes clarifies that the limit of work goes within 15 feet of the bordering vegetated Wetland due to previously due to the previously existing I think it it means paved I think the word paved should probably be in there uh as in paved area and the controls are similarly placed because of the previously existing paid are uh it's the last line it's it's labeled it's the top of page two but I don't know if that's going to be accurate coming out of uh Google tribe but it's it's it concerns 92 East Main Street determination 40 and it's the um the description of the discussion for that and it it's the last line um where I think the word existing paved area yeah because there was some pavement there and I don't know do we have yeah I mean it it was Disturbed um either paved or disturbed you know I think it was Pavement in the back where where he was describing that they were placing them along the edge of the the paved area so I think paved is fine yeah thank you all right so uh any other comments or questions if not we can consider a motion to accept the draft as corrected so moved second we have a motion by Dan seconded by Joe Lisa and Joe how do you vote stain hi and T and Dan hi hi Mark hi and I'll throw it an I so we have um five eyes and one Oben our next um items I don't know if we can really I mean Megan is there anything to comment when it comes to uh conservation office updates um just that John Thomas will be on vacation the first week of August um and then I'll be on vacation the third week of August so uh I don't think he'll be missing any meetings in August but I will be missing one and then oh thank you I I will also be missing uh the the second meeting in August but uh so I don't know if Lisa your schedule is going to be make it possible for you to jump into that meeting or not yeah that's the 12th is it the 12th uh no it would be the um oh 26th yes yes yep I can that one that's about it for office updates okay and then uh next is enforcement order 92 East Main Street I don't know do we have somebody wants to talk about that to us I'll be talking about that my name is Joe O'Brien from Capital Engineering Services and we're representing eil LC now as I understand it this this will be um notice of intent filing is that correct we believe it's being done under an enforcement order okay well we'll have to um he you well I don't know Lisa maybe you can comment and usually it's okay there's the forcement order is a notice of a of a problem and then usually the correction unless it's something minor uh the correction is a file a notice so that a more precise explanation of exactly what's going to be done and then the restoration but U but you can you can work that out with with John you have file the restoration plan that Mr Thomas had agreed upon and that in front of you yeah you want the restoration plan first Julian and you can always follow it up with a notice of intent like de facto after the fact and the important thing I think about this is timing wise um if it's a restoration plan we want to get it approved and we want to get them started in the fall and then the notice can follow after that so I I don't know what the violation was could you go over that actually question do you have a plan you can share and Megan I don't know if you can I don't know how many of you have this plan that was given by Mr Thomas we submitted this well y so I can share the plan not a problem hold on one okay yeah I think is this the first time we're seeing this or did was it presented in August it it is we're see specific okay the violation was notified back in in the previous meeting and we said we respond we responded with a restoration plan which was approved by Mr Thomas and now we're putting in front of you to take a look at it as well so if I can go real quickly um there's an area that was enhanced with some millings for for parking and uh it was restored from old millings but in over the years the old millings kind of got eroded and some plants came in there and it got a little more organic we'll call it so um what we're going to do is we're going to store this area back to where it was in 2023 and we're going to remove the millings in the pink area pull them back and then we're going to restore them with a top dressing of LOM and seed and prior to doing any of that work we're going to put a straw baale uh BM around the entire area can you can tell us where this is is this a business is this I'm sorry Mr Rose I did not hear you oh where where are we here where is this yeah let me just fill in this this is the area behind what used to be the Midway garage okay okay yeah yeah and and I think the the paved area which um you can see you see the two buildings and then it goes up to a solid line which is the paved area that I think was previously permitted but you can see the two dotted lines which I believe are the inner and outer riparian zones um where a lot of the work was done inadvertently not not realizing that it was a rather sensitive zone for Riverfront yes the MS had been there before they had degraded run it out you know collapsed and so um nature took over and started growing in those areas so uh the areas the Mings were restored and that was brought to our attention of the work and uh as we're here today we're willing to pull all that back and restore back where it was in 2023 I assume there a planting plan that goes with this we're we're going to L and Seed it what was there so in 2023 it was loed and Seed it wasn't vegetarian no it was was even worse than that we're going to make it better than it was it's okay so there no trees or um herbaceous layer okay no no ma'am okay so historically this was used for parking equipment that was being repaired at the Midway garage is that your understanding not necessarily repaired but there there was uh Vehicles parked all throughout the back and continued to be so um but they're not they're not being repaired out there there's a proper repair area up front in the buildings oh no I understand but it previously was a garage that had an active uh it's still it's still a garage yes excess vehicles but these these window these vehicles are are new is that correct I I thought they the business has changed uh to provide more uh bus transportation Vehicles so these are these are bigger vehicles that are coming through being rehabed or just being turned over and sold okay so has John asked for any type of barrier to be put back there there's no barrier there just going to be the um solitation barrier when we do the work the use of the area will not change it's just the surface one right I'm looking for something maybe longer term to show whatever tenant ends up there or owner that that's a basically a no disturb Zone it's not just lawn that they can I mean are they going to mow it yes absolutely okay I personally think need some type of barrier out there to umk we are going to move Vehicles across that barrier so anything might restrict the movement might not work okay I'm sorry I I need to make the distinction during construction obviously you're you're going to be in there I'm talking about post restoration as well as I am so you're going to have vehicles back there of course they've always been there but you're going to put Al alum seat it and have vehicles on them I'm I'm really confused right now well don't be confused it was always used for parking it was always used for vehicles nature came over brought in some grass and some of the weedy areas grew in and so when they restored it to the old millings that was called the violation so we're going to remove those new millings but you're going to have vehicles now traversing lawn is that right as they always have correct well well I'm not talking about what they always have we need to make this better so if you're going to be we make the ground better but we're going to keep the use the same okay okay we need to take a deep breath sir so one thing is if you're can to now use that we need to talk about storm water management we need to talk about potential reding and erosion from the occupation of that lawn for vehicle Vehicles traversing that so I don't think that should just be restored to lawn and then you drive vehicles over it that's not a normal wearing course for vehicles regardless of what it was this is what you want to do right now so to me a lawn is not really an acceptable base to have Vehicles driving over what's what's to prevent erosion what's what's grass takes then that area will avoid erosion no I'm sorry but that's not that's not going to cut it so I think we're going to have to talk to John Thomas about this because I don't think this is a long-term solution I thought this was going to be vegetated and you were going to walk away and it was not going to be disturbed I don't think this is the appropriate ground cover or vehicle traffic and use so well again the use the future use of the property would be as it was before so if there's another restoration plan or another way to go we want we'll do that as well right but do do you see where I'm going it's it's really not appropriate yeah it's not appropriate I I'll let you know that prior to this if you walked out there you would see the sand and gravel you would see the weeds and you'd say there's nothing going to Road here there's nothing going to grow here but weeds we're doing this in response to the request from the Conservation Commission to to to to um bring in some soil that might uh been degraded right and that's so if you stopped right there I'd be perfectly fine with it but now you're telling me you're going to have vehicles parked and and running over that lawn which makes zero sense so just saying um I I I I absolutely see your point and and I agree whole harly okay so I think we need to talk to to to John about um what we're trying to achieve here um julan well I mean I I don't I'm I'm presuming this business location and this activity predates the Wetland protection act that's that's the only thing that's going through they coming to us now but they're coming to us now this is a new owner and this is a use that we have and never approved well but I I mean I don't know the rules with regard to uh whether or not you can ask a business to stop using an area that had been used for that activity since before the weedland protection act was in so okay I agree with you so what we're going to do then is we're going to ask them to put up what some pavement some stor Water Management we need to put something down you can't just have driving over the lawn well that's that's that's the question is is they had attempt to restore uh a working surface but the materials that they chose were perhaps a poor choice I mean if it had been clean um you know Cobblestone type gravel that would not emit uh hydrocarbon slowly into the riverfront area that might have been a better choice and I and I I I think we're going to need input from John first about the the administrative limits of what we can request and second you know finding a choice which is might be better for the use that will continue without the pollution concerns in the in the particularly the inter raran Zone um although the whole area is in both zones yeah so I I think that's what we have to discuss is to we're not I don't think we're going to be able to say well you can't do that activity in that but we can come up with something that is less challenging to the the riverfront um and I I so I mean I I we're not going to be definitive here tonight we're going to is the introduction of the problem and so I I think we can be certain we need to continue this discussion okay um and I know I know John will be back uh at our next meeting and Megan and you uh will certainly go over the details of this discussion with him I assume yes I and then then we can get back up to speed as to the proposed best path um but I think we have to accept this activity is continued but uh mam millings is is not an ideal material to put in there and I don't I mean I think Lisa's point is well taken but lman seed is not necessarily the best choice either yeah M was what was there before they're putting back what was there before we'd love to find a substitute in between that works for both of us well but but you know certainly uh clean coarse well I don't know you know uh it wouldn't necessarily be coarse but it wouldn't necessarily be PE Stone but something a little bigger than PE Stone might be a less less polluting yet more durable uh material but I I think we have to get John's input as to you know he's got the the overview of the historical uh component of this issue yeah and I'd also just be curious to see what type of equip is equipment um or is it the buses that are going to be restored like what's going to be stored back there or what type of vehicles are going to use it and that to me is going to tell me what type of material we put down so yeah think about buses may not be the correct term it may be more like bands um okay all right so any further questions um and so um I mean this is you know I I think what we should do is have you be back in touch with the office when John is available and then they can potentially put it on the agenda for either next meeting or the meeting after uh with regard to talking about more specifics thank you Mr chairman sound like a plan that sounds great thank you again all right so I don't know if we need to um um a formal motion to but I you know I think it's it's pretty clear John needs to be involved and it'll get put back on the agenda uh when there's more discussion and perhaps a vote for a decision word agreement to that thank you all right any further comments if not I think we can consider that one all set thank you sir good back back thank you you uh next is um I mean it's just informational uh there there was an item uh uh at 258 Lane Street um Megan I don't know if we can bring up um a plan or I don't know it's not going to um it has to do with a facility that is being used one second okay um and we we um there was a a new a new request I believe that triggered a review of the activity of that site which again showed some historical changes from aerial photos um and it's activity yeah here we go so this is uh adjacent the um is it a mbery book um yeah mury um metal Brook is right here going into Lake wi so this is uh Plain Street where it just goes near Lake wion and the mury brook passes down through uh adjacent this property um and highlighted on this map is activity within um within the buffer zone and then we have I I'm assuming the blue dots is the the inner riparian of the uh let's see no we yes that's the outer that's the outer riparium zone uh labeled there that's the 200 foot from mbre Brook so there's a little bit of activity in the outer riparian zone and then there's some activity in the uh looks like the outer portion of the buer the the outer 50 ft so I think none of this apparently is documented under a prior order so I think at the very least this may require some kind of retroactive filing because now the the homeowner has uh open activity in the buffer zone that will be a potential problem in the future so uh I think some procedure to review the activity and and U resolve it resolve the paperwork so that there's no problem in the future with regard to sale of the property Etc but but I think John needs to weigh in as to exactly what what issues need to be resed so again I don't think we can really act on it we just this is more informational as to uh what has to be any questions I I can't necessarily answer to the um the other thing is that he hasn't out on the site um these are just the aerial views um it started cuz the homeowner wanted the an addition placed here and so uh building had to have conservation sign off and he took a look and he saw that a lot of um work was done without permitting and he kind of guesstimated based on aerial views however um he hasn't been able to go out on site and verify any of the uh wetlands and based on the plans provided they didn't really show uh what lands or at least depict accurately um what was onsite so that is kind of what uh made him look at the aerial views and make this a rendition of a plan yeah I mean it doesn't really look like the activity would have been not allowed I mean it's not it's not you know right adjacent or in the Wetland so it's just I mean from my perspective it's it it just needs to be twed up uh with a with a filing a retroactive filing um so that every you know the paperwork's in order I mean would you agree that there's activity there in the in the buffer but it's probably activity that we probably would have approved yes and I just oh sorry uh I was going to say I spoke to the engineer today because he dropped off plans and he said that he hadn't been able to work on uh additional plans for the violation um but that he was looking at updating them so so the important thing always keep in mind with Riverfront is it's like the meters ticking right so you're only allowed up to 10% of the riverfront area a disturbance does 10% of the riverfront area on the project site so that's what we just want to be mindful of in like the findings or just to make sure they're not going over that 10% threshold that's what's important for Riverfront so anyway all right so this this something is obviously gonna have to come before us in detail so it sounds like they're on their way Megan with an engineer they're probably going to have the Wet Ones flagged and give us a plan um that's the hope but I haven't heard um specifically besides what the engineer said I haven't heard from the applicant themselves okay okay all right uh that's kind of the end of our agenda I'll make okay sounds like I'll take it oh let's see where 41 minutes into it not too bad all right so I'll be wait for a little while but I will be at the next meeting all right all right good night everybody good night next time by see bye bye bye