Conservation Commission - Regular Meeting

All right, I I will call the meeting uh to order. Um before we get started, let's introduce everyone on this meeting. I'm Sandy Brock. When I call your name, please confirm that you can hear me by verifying that you are present. We'll start with the commissioners. Travis, I'm here. Jonathan, present. Very good. Amamira present. Noah present. And we'll go staff. Leah, I'm here. And Jan present.

Very good. Uh, this open meeting of the conservation commission is being conducted remotely via Zoom pursuant to Governor Baker's March 12th, 2020 order as most recently extended on March 28th, 2025. Access information for the public has been provided on the town website. The meeting is being recorded. Please remember to mute your phone on your computer or your computer when you are not speaking. This is done on the phone by pressing star six. As chair, I will introduce each speaker on the agenda. Please note that you will not have screen sharing privileges, but staff can display any visuals per your queue. Uh during um periods of public comment, participants must use the raise hand icon in the Zoom menu bar to indicate they would like to speak. This is done on the phone by pressing star 9 and then star six to unmute when you are called on. Participants who raise their hand will be recognized one at a time and will be promoted to speak. Finally, each vote uh will be conducted by a roll call vote. As a reminder, the commission is concerned with state and town wetlands and storm water regulations. Concerns outside the purview uh need to be addressed to appropriate boards. For example, road conditions must be addressed uh with the select board and traffic concerns must be addressed with the planning board. All right. I see that you switched up the times here. Very good. Um anything to do in two minutes or should we just wait for the 705 hearing? uh minutes and the annual town report might fit.

Okay. So, let's start with the minutes. Has everyone had a chance to look at it? And I'll put it out there and go around very quickly. Um, you know, uh, does any have any comments or questions? Jonathan, no comments. No questions on the minutes. Travis, no comments. Amir, no comments or questions. Noah, nothing from me. I also had did not have any comments. Do I have a motion? I'll move to approve the meeting minutes from January 6, 2026. Second. And we have a motion and a second. Roll call vote. Jonathan, you're on the screen, so you get to go first. Yes. Uh Noah, yes. Ara,

yes. And Travis, yes. I am also a yes. The motion carries unanimously. Okay, so next one. Hope everyone had a chance to read the town annual town report. Uh Leah, do you have anything to say upfront about this? No. Um well, I it was due the end of January, so it has been submitted, but if anyone has any tweaks they wanted, I'm sure it probably is not with the publisher yet, so just let me know.

Okay. Um I did take a quick scan of it. Uh I don't know the numbers off the top of my head. So, but uh this all seems um similar to what we've done in the past. So, I don't have any issues with it. Quick, uh uh checking with the commissioners. Noah, nothing from me. Yeah, nothing. Uh Travis, no. Nothing for me. And Jonathan, for me? Yep. And I had nothing. So, uh, you know, if it's all set, thank you very much, Leah, for getting that done.

Look at that. It's 7:05. All right. So, we'll get into public hearings. Okay. So pursuant to the mass Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act Act and the Grafton Wetlands Protection bylaw, conservation commission will hold a public hearing uh to act upon a notice of intent application for Grafton wetlands bylaw permit for the construction of a single family house at 21 Metobrook Road. Uh so uh Leah, do you have any anything to start off the public hearing or any comments? Or if not, I'll switch right to the applicant. No, they can start. That's fine.

Sure. Great. So, uh, the applicant is here. If you want to unmute yourself, uh, the floor is yours. You can just kind of go through, uh, what you're doing with the with 21 Meet Brook. And I know you have a little bit of a history. The floor is yours. All right. Um, good evening everybody. Um, Senator Jonathan, um, good to see you again. I think it's been about four years since we were last together on here. Um, could you just I'm sorry. I should have said this up front. Name and address just uh for the record. Um James Conkey, property owner of 21 Meadow Brook Road in Grafton. Thank you very much. Sorry about that.

Not a problem. Um rest of you, nice to meet you. Um to be honest, I was expecting uh Bob to be on the call this evening, but we'll go ahead and present the project regardless. Um so we have resubmitted. Um there's a little history on the project here. We first filed back in 2020 um with the intent to reclassify the small stream that runs through the front part of the property where the driveway crossing will be located um as an intermittent stream. It had previously been reclassified as such. Um we've not had a year with weather conducive um to that reclassification over the last several years. So, we have changed up the plans to um adjust the intermittent stream classification to the perennial stream um as it's currently mapped and we've adjusted the site plans to meet all of the regulations of the riverfront act accordingly. Um, I know so, uh, Bob Murphy, who is, um, is is my wetland scientist and land planner, um, has met a couple times with Jan, I believe, in the last couple of weeks. Um, I met with Jan and Leah, uh, in 2025 to go over all the items that needed to be adjusted um, to meet the intent of the Riverfront Act and, uh, meet all said regulations. So, we've resubmitted and I believe at this point the plans um reflect all of the requirements um to proceed with uh with construction on the property following issuance of uh NOI.

Sure. So, uh thank you for that introduction. Leah, you want to just kind of go through your re report to date and um a little bit of the history and then we can uh check around with the uh the commission.

Sure. Um, so this property had a filing in 2020. Um, as Mr. Con mentioned to say, uh, the the stream was intermittent at the time or they were trying to say that the stream was intermittent at the time that has been withdrawn. So, this is its own filing. Um, new D number and everything. Um, we are waiting on that D number. So, we don't have comments there just yet. Um, this is within the ACE in town, but uh, wetland impacts are allowed in the ACEC if it's a limited project. They are filing as a limited project. Um, I have the citation here somewhere. um 310 CMR 10533E which is the provision to allow a driveway to cross um in order to construct a house on the upland on the site. Um we have engaged Ecotech for peer review um but nothing can be confirmed till we have snow melt. So that is on hold. Um, I also talked to the board of health. They said that soil testing was done back in 2020. Um, those approvals were then voided because it was found that the testing was done in the wetlands. More testing was submitted about a month after that voided approval, but that's as far as the board of health records go. So, I don't think they have an approved septic and well plan on file with the board of health. Um, other than those items for background, uh, the list of,

um, issues or items to be addressed are really more for Bob Murphy's response and he's not here, but I I'm here. Okay. You just joined us. Yes, I'm here. Um, so I mean, I'll I'll list some off for the commission. Um, Sandy, do you want me to go like one at a time? Do you want me to pause now if anyone has any questions first? How do you want to handle this?

Um, why don't you go um one at a time? Um, actually, no. I I don't you go through them first so everyone kind of sees what they are and and um then we can go back and hit each one if the different commissioners have any comments on it and give an opportunity for the applicant and their consultant to respond to that. So just kind of go through all of them and um Okay. Yeah.

Sure. Um, so the delineation that's being used on this plan is the same delineation from 2020. It's just that the stream is labeled as perennial. So I brought this to their attention because that would be an expired delineation. So it needs to be updated or rechecked or verified if it really hasn't changed. Um, in response to that, the applicant submitted title 5 soil logs, which is not what we're looking for. Um, we also need the when the delineation is revised, we'll need to double check and make sure they still meet our contiguous upland requirement as well, but I don't have um solid numbers to do that right now. The stream crossing standards need to be addressed. Um, sheet two of the plans has a little bit of detail to that regard. Um, but that's another thing that will be checked by Ecotech. Um, I gave another citation from the regulations 310 CMR 10.584D, which is the section of the regulations that talk about the amount of dis of disturbance or development allowed in the riverfront area and I asked them to address those provisions. However, we don't have clear riverfront impact numbers. The numbers change between the plans and the NOI and the narrative. So, I don't know what the real numbers are. Um, and those that citation I gave is where the act talks about that you're allowed 10% or 5,000 square ft of disturbance in the riverfront area, whichever is greater. So, it's hard to do that math not knowing the concrete numbers. They're also hinging on the limited project status in order to exceed those numbers. but some of the numbers they're giving very significantly exceed those numbers. So, that's a conversation the

commission is going to need to have as well. Um, from here on out, it's smaller things uh questions we've raised or um exercises we've asked them to go through with the plans. Uh, such as that dark rectangle north of the proposed culvert that we were asking what that is, it's now labeled as a foot bridge, but I don't know if it's existing proposed. Is it going to be removed? Um, the plans talk about native vegetation will be promoted within the no disturb and we asked what that really means. They added a note that says existing native trees and shrubs are to remain undisturbed in the no disturb. But then we asked, you know, are they proposing plantings to supplement what's already there? That has not been addressed. Um, there was a polygon on the plans that previously was labeled uh brush. That label has been changed to field when we asked what it was. Um, again, is that existing? Is it proposed to stay that way? We need details for their proposed native grass plantings. What species, where, how much. Um, they're proposing a no disturb barrier behind the house. We asked for that to extend to the property line. The revised line now goes off through the woods. Um, we asked for their maximum groundwater elevations and dates that those measurements were taken. They added data again from 2020 to the plans, but that would be outdated. Um, the li limit of disturbance line also needs adjustment to the true limit of disturbance. It was previously shown cutting through the house and the driveway. That part has been revised, but there's still erosion control and a no disturb barrier outside the limit of

disturbance. Um, erosion control is proposed within the BVW and it should be moved to the edge of it. They have not addressed that. We asked about a dewatering plan um for work that's going to occur within the perennial stream. Sheet two talks about their temporary 12-in PVC as a bypass structure, but means and methods are not given. Um we also asked if the utility line is staying overhead or if it's going to be buried um entering the property and how it will span the culvert. They did add the detail uh on sheet two where they show the culvert detail. It does show it as now buried. Um some new comments that arose from the revised packet they submitted. The well is now shown off in the woods. Again, they do not, to my knowledge, have approval from the board of health. There's new red dashed lines that we're not sure what those are for. Um, and the unaltered oval shape between the house and the septic system. It's still not exactly clear if if that's just an area they don't intend to disturb at all. It's going to need some kind of protection to make sure that happens during construction. Um, other than that, I I gave the finding for you guys about the limited project provision. They are requesting a waiver to work in the no disturb because they have to to cross. And I listed uh the quantified impacts they're proposing, but I was questioning if land underwater will have an impact as well because if you're working right in the channel or need to dewater, it'll at least be a temporary impact. So that is going to need to be

added as well. Um I think that's plenty for you guys to chew on. So I'll stop there. Okay. So, I'll start first by going around uh the commission. I know I I took a look at the plans and so forth, so I have a couple of of questions also, but um let's start with the commission. Uh Jonathan, any specific questions on just kind of this initial review of uh the plans and so forth. Have any questions at this time? Okay. Uh Amira, any questions? No questions at this time. Okay. Uh, Noah, any questions? Not right now. And Travis,

uh, just a couple quick points of clarification. So, under the River Protection Act, if this lot is a post 96 lot, if I'm reading it right, then you can't exceed that 10% alteration without some sort of mitigation that offsets the impact. So, we just want to emphasize that it looks like we're exceeding that first threshold in the Rivers Protection Act. So, that just goes back to when this lot was created. I think it was post 96 based on the information that was submitted.

And then I think we also have to maintain 100 foot wide undisturbed buffer minus I think there's an exemption to put in a driveway because you've got to be able to put in a driveway.

Correct. But, and I think Leah touched on this, but there's a 25 foot no disturb on the plans, but no solid 100 foot no disturb from the riverfront area. And then, so that's another red flag for me. Um, and then quickly, there's a reference to there are no endangered species on the property, but there's no methodology or citation for that, which is another item in the river protection act that has to be. So, it'd be great if we just had a citation for how that determination was made. Um, okay. We probably might have some more things later on, but just wanted to emphasize those points.

Right. And again, when you're talking about a limited project and the fact that you can access the upland to um on a site that as in this case here has a stream going through it. That's that's as Leah had previously mentioned. understand that this is a little more complicated because it's a riverfront. I'm very curious to see what DP has for comments. Uh to your point, Travis, you know, the um the subject system is outside the 100 ft buffer. Um but there is grading within there. Um obviously the driveway needs to be put in in a you know limited project because that's how you're getting to the um to the upland area. Uh those are just some of the details that need to kind of be worked out. Looking through the plans. Um I had a couple other minor uh questions, you know, just as like the well and so forth. You know, obviously we do not review or approve the the the well itself, but my guess is you'd have to, you know, um not have any trees uh adjacent to the the well, and you'd have to probably amend that tree line a little bit. Um but that's pretty minor and again we will defer it to um the board of health for the the well permit and so forth. The same thing as far as um the septic system uh you know looking at it I really don't you know I'm not going to make any comments on it. That is uh up to the board of health. It is outside the 100 foot uh riverfront zone and um outside of the uh setbacks from the wetlands. So, I'll leave that up to the board of health to kind of have any comments. Um, some of the other comments that, uh, I was looking at, uh, when looking at the plans, uh, some of these are pretty minor, is is the fact that there's a foundation drain, which is absolutely no

issue. It's groundwater. Um, it just doesn't show up where it discharges to. It just has a known on it uh, to daylight. And again, I don't think that's a problem, but the places where you need to daylight is probably based on the elevations of, you know, uh based on depending upon uh if it's got a basement and so forth that you're going to be down into the 100 foot buffer zone, 100 foot um uh repairarian zone into the uh river. So I again this is not a it's a it's a single pipe and it discharge and it's discharging groundwater. I don't think it's a big issue but it's not shown on here. We just want to make sure we identify that that that particular one um exists and it's in um if it was going to the rear of the lot there wouldn't be a question but the problem is elevation wise I don't think it will work that way. Um, the other thing I was looking at, and this is more just um in reference to the access driveway, um, and I didn't actually scale it out, but I'm wondering what the the slope is coming up it right as you exit the 100 foot, um, you know, riverfront zone, it looks like is pretty steep in that area. um to some of the things that Travis mentioned, you know, as far as um the uh you know, the stream crossing and and what's exactly going on there. Um there's some details and so forth. They just I think to you know, some of uh Leah's comments, they just need to have some details added to kind of understand that. Um to me the biggest question still goes back to you have a lot lot of work going on in the 100 foot um riverfront area and I'm really curious to see what D says whether they they think that is allowed under the um

limited project or is that something that would have to require a variance from D. And if it is something that needs a variance from D that's kind of got to go to D. we're not going to really um be able to approve that so to speak. Um kind of the other issues with the with the crossing and with the you know as far as like you know the existing stream and and the width of the culvert and so forth and the stream crossing requirements and and the the depth. It's a it does have a bottom on the culvert usually not done with the bottom. That's usually, but they have a um a riverbed in there. Obviously, once we have EcoTech review this, they'll be able to comment on that. Um some of the uh water quality swailes, uh just looking for a little bit more detail on how that's being put together. Um don't have a big issue with them. It's just want to make sure, um how they're being constructed so that there's no issues with erosion or anything else. uh because of them. Um those were mostly the questions that I had. Um a lot of the more of the detail stuff and more of getting more information uh specifically from D. It's been a while since I've worked on a limited project, so I need to refresh my memory on the regulations on what you can and cannot do for a limited project like this. Um, obviously that's in place so that if you do own uh property and again there's a very specific things and to the applicant, you know, really making sure you understand when this lot was created, it has a big impact uh on what you're allowed to do or not to do. So, um I think that's all I had uh Leah. So, I will give it back to the applicant and his representative to We're not

going to answer all these. We don't have a D number yet, you know, so we'll have to continue. But I think it's fair to give you kind of what our initial thoughts are just so that you understand them. Um, and just kind of how we can work through this um to make sure that it meets the requirements of the Wellness Protection Act. So, I will hand it back to the applicant.

Okay. I'm Bob Murphy representing James Con uh at 21 Middle Road. Uh uh essentially the first remark that I have is that I can see in areas where you would require additional detail and we're we're prepared uh to to give you that as far as water quality swailes specifics about the more information on the um crossing itself. the foot bridge just for your information. It's existing. Uh it's being used by the a the uh a butter uh it's an old wooden foot bridge. It's actually sitting on top of the stone wall. It was built on top of a stone wall that crosses over in that area. Uh we're not uh contesting that or anything. We're just going to leave that alone. As far as erosion controls there, I did put some of the erosion controls within the 25 foot no disturb area. Uh mainly because of the wetland replication, uh we will be, you know, scraping up the soil there and we don't want to have uh erosion. You know, if we had a a terrible storm or whatever, we don't want erosion in that area. As far as timing, we we do not anticipate any major dewatering requirements. Uh the notes essentially say that uh you know we're hoping to do the work for the culvert quite quickly. The culvert crossing itself would take you know three or four you know hard days work. Uh but again we plan on doing that when the stream is dry. the

the stream has dried up a few times in the past few years, but every time it did, there was it was considered to be a drought. Uh, which is why we waited a few years to come back to you. We were really trying to determine uh if it could be, you know, classified as a an intermittent stream. And we didn't have any luck with that. Uh it it did dry up however it was always during a period of uh drought. Um the limited project the idea of that was to essentially follow the regulations of a limited project where the only access to uh the good soil for the septic system was in the area where we did the testing. We we did quite a bit of testing around the site. uh the more you got to the rear the the worse it got and in the in the front it was a woodbridge a thick woodbridge soil with a with a heavy underllayment and the sea horizon was very dense. Uh we added quite a few water quality swailes just to control the flow of water. We found by putting check dams we could um you know enhance the the flow and the the quality of water entering in down toward the stream area. Um, as far as the the tree line is really taken from a photograph, uh, and that is the, you know, the tree line is the over story of the trees. We plan on placing the well, the well is right near the edge of the tree line, but there's there's no need to cut down any trees or anything. um you know, we could stay away from the trunks and things like that to put the well in and

then that would be something that would be um noted and would may require conservation approval, but we would locate it and um get back to you on that. Uh, as far as the um the general work of the site, we're proposing to do as little work as possible to develop the driveway and uh the crossing. keep that all to a a minority. And uh the uh erosion controls, the water quality, swailes, uh in the riverfront zone requirements, they talk about things that you can deduct and the area used for storm water management can be and and for replication can be deducted from the the numbers. So what I did show uh on the on the notes on on the site plan was the total area was within the riverfront zone was 50 52620 52,620 and then I broke that up into the inner riperian zone was 29,000 the outer was 22 and change and then I looked at the disturbed areas and it was in both cases it was over uh 5,000. We uh we agree on that. The the idea is that we we get to um deduct areas that are used for storm water management. As far as the yeah the central area there where I show a continuous upland area and and not altered, it's 2,000 square ft. um that is heavily grassed

right now with a lot of native grasses coming in there and we you know we could put in uh some a barrier, stone fence, snow fence or whatever. Uh but there's no need to do any grading or anything in that area. That's pretty much the front area. Um as far as native vegetation, this area has not been mowed for hay for many years. And what's happening is the uh a lot of the native shrubs are coming in by themselves. Uh especially along the 25 foot no disturb area. So we're pretty much figuring just you know to let the um you know things like the the several dog woods, red maples, even some white pines, things like that. Let them just come in naturally. Uh we did put a uh seed mix from u New England seed to you utilize in the grass areas. Uh and again that's uh shown shown the different species for that. The idea is to make the site make the site as as using as much native vegetation as possible even in the even in the grass areas. Uh I don't believe that the applicant wishes to mow all this area. They they their intention is really to leave a lot of it native as well. So you you can have grasses mow some of them, but they're native they're native grasses. uh trying to think any as you know some of the erosion controls are within the no disturb area and again that was essentially to control sedimentation passing through from the upper areas

uh the the driveway the steepness of the driveway you know we again did as little filling as possible and you maintain a driveway that doesn't really go over 10%. And that's just a short area near the the septic system. As far as the board of health is concerned, uh we originally had a plan submitted around 2020. Uh and I talked with Nancy at the board of health and she agreed that uh what we really should do is you know have an approval from the conservation commission before we um ask again apply for the septic system and the well approval. Uh and we also realize that the period of u testing has expired uh and that requires continuation extension from the board of health. Uh the the line I've walked the site a couple of times the past few years. The line really uh hasn't changed. It's pretty much followed. It's following the water table. Uh there's been no alteration on this site. So the water table remains, you know, what it is. Um, I anticipate that you would be giving me a, you know, a list of additional, you know, questions and things like that and we could, you know, we could certainly take care of that. U, I did have one question and it was relative to, um, water table. Um, other than the septic system, we did do a fair amount of testing in that area. The previous testing was not done by me, but it was done by some people that apparently didn't know where the wetlands were uh because they were uh in areas that you know were were not

suitable for a septic system. But um they did have high groundwater in that area as well, but we're not we're not doing any work there. Um, essentially what we're, again, as I mentioned, we're trying to do the minimum amount of work necessary uh to gain access to to the upland property in the rear. Um, and I guess we we don't have the D file number and I I anticipate, you know, hearing what D has to say about it as well. uh that will make it a lot more clearer as as to you know what direction we should take here. Um with that I I'll give it back to the to the chair and um James may have something to say. I'll I'll let him speak but uh what I've tried to do is give you the uh physical engineering aspects of it. So, you mentioned uh about the board of health saying maybe you would want to wait and so forth. That's up to you guys. I I you know, we're not going to tell you when to do things at all. I'm just wondering once we get the information from D is some of the grading around the septic system. Um whether they're going to see if you that could be minimized or something because that is all within the 100 foot buffer. And there's ways to do that. It's just that you we want to we don't want to approve something that says, "Hey, this is what you know, D has this comment and they want us to tighten up that slope and there's requirements under title five and there's different things that you can do under title five. Uh you may want to just keep an open dialogue with the board of health if that grading um east of the system needs to change. Uh and that's and that would be based on um

the amount of alteration within the uh the inner repairarian or the 100 ft uh riverfront zone. Um and then you know I will double check as far as the swailes and whether that type of storm water system is is something that exempt from the disturbance and so forth. Um those to me are just those are some of the details we need to kind of work through. obviously our um you know peer reviewer will help us through that. So um I I'll turn it back to uh James if you have any other kind of comments. I mean bottom line is is we do need more information and more than anything else we need a D number because we can't really do much. Um and then after whatever you have to say we just need to discuss um the lovely snow we're all dealing with which kind of impacts your particular site. So, James, if you have anything else to add, please do.

Um, no, not really. Thank you all for, you know, taking a detailed look at the plans. I think we need to get that D file number, any comments they have. We'll see what Ecote Tech comes back with for comments and um, you know, collect that list of comments we can address and go from there. Yep. And e even though this is a challenging lot and so forth, um we'll go by the regulations and if you can make it work, then we're that's the way it's going to go. Uh but we just want to make sure that we're doing our due diligence and making sure that everything, you know, is according to um the regulations, especially the riverfront because that's a little bit more

has a little bit more um constraints in it and it has like uh as already discussed the whole idea of the 10% or 5,000 square feet. It's a hard number in the regulations where so many other things in the regulation there's a there's room to kind of look at each individual case. Riverfront's a little different. So that's why I'm eager to get DP's kind of um their comments to see what they say and how they react to not so much the driveway going through the the inner riparian but some of the grading and that extent. So um and we'll also you know be looking at that too. So, uh, Leah, anything else to add at this point?

No, not right now.

Yeah. So, I mean, we've just, you know, again, we're kind of a little bit in the same boat as you. We're waiting for some other input, i.e. D and the, you know, and and from our peer review or Ecotech because I think that will help us. Um, and then what I will do is is at this point uh we'll open up if anyone um is uh any of the public is is looking to ask questions or anything else. I'll have Jan take a look at that to see if anyone is here. And if anyone wants to make a comment, I'll put that out there. And then um then I'll go around one more time to the conservation commissioners just to see if they have after this conversation anything else to add. So I'll uh start with Travis if you've got anything else to add.

Nothing else right now. All right. Thank you. Jonathan, nothing else to add here. Yeah, air. Nothing from me. Noah, nothing from me either.

I'm in the same place. and you know some of the details that we mentioned those are things that just have to be dealt with. I think it's the bigger questions around the riverfront and making sure that we're all on the same page and like what Leah has done with going through and putting all the citations. Those are the key things. Having read many of these sections before, trust me, I have to go back and read them again and then we'll look for our uh peer reviewer to help us in that interpretation and along with D and what their comments are. So that's kind of the next step. Um and again start thinking about just the fact that we've got I don't know 2 feet of snow out there um to kind of do any of the updates is going to be a little bit difficult at this point in time. Uh we can further discuss that at at the um at the next meeting and based on the fact um that we don't have a D number yet um we're not close to closing. I'll ask you as the applicant if you'd like to continue this meeting either to the next meeting or a future meeting. I'll leave that up to you. It's your decision. Um and one of the next meetings, Leah,

um February 17, March 3, March 17. So, so, uh, so James, it's up to you if you want to wait till March or not, or we can just, uh, continue this to the 17th and see what happens and see if we had get the D letter and so forth. I'd say let's continue to the 17th. If there's no updates at that point, then we can continue from there. All right, that sounds good. I'll go back to Jan. Was there anyone in the public that had any comments or raised their hand? Nothing from the public.

Nothing from the public. Okay. Um Leah, anything else to add at this point? Otherwise, we'll make a motion to continue it and obviously start continue to follow up. Um you'll get the D letter and and hopefully EcoTech has done their review. I do not know if their review will be complete or not, but again, it's the snow. It's it's the weather. We can't really do much about that. Um, anything else, Leah? Nope. Okay. So, the applicant has requested a continuence to the 17th, February 17th. Um, uh, do I have a motion to continue?

I'll move to continue the hearing for 21 Metobrook to the 17th of March. And do we have a second? Hold on. Do we mean March or February? Oh, I'm sorry. February 17th. Fe I mean se February 17th. Okay. Thank you. Uh February always screws us up because it's 28 days is perfectly ends in four weeks. So thank you Leah for being uh our watchdog and catching that. So it's uh problem February 17th. Um so based on that and then I'll then Jonathan just second that. Uh roll call vote. Uh air. Yes. Noah,

yes. Um, Travis, yes. Jonathan, yes. And I am Yes. And we'll see you in a couple weeks. Hopefully, you'll see me. I may not be around, but we'll see you in a couple weeks and see what information that we have based on hopefully getting a D number, comments, and Ecote Tech some input. Um, but other than that, stay warm. Let's let's hope for some melting. um and see in a couple weeks. All right, sounds good. Thank you all. Thanks. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Yep. So, Leah, up next, um we have uh some folks online from uh the team for Highfields subdivision. Um, they are not formally listed on the agenda tonight because their certificate of compliance request is uh sitting in our online permitting software with a bunch of comments I had provided that weren't addressed. So, we hadn't kicked it to the step of a meeting just yet, but they wanted to talk to you guys anyway. Um, I think we might need to promote them to panelists so they can chime in here.

Do I need to recuse myself, Leah? Um they are talking about the subdivision as a whole. So yeah, since you're a direct debut butter, I mean it's up to you and your comfort level, but it is the subdivision entirely. So was there anything else after this? No. So if I don't come back, that's okay. Correct. Unless you need to make an official declaration, Sandy. Uh uh no. Uh if if you want to accuse yourself, you're not voting, right? I've been influencing myself on all things how I field. So why stop? I have no problem with and you know you notice that I actually leave my room so I I don't influence anyone else. So the fact that if you want to step off that's no problem at all either.

All right. Well, have a good evening if I don't talk to you again tonight. You too.

Thank you. Okay. Um go ahead, Leah. Okay. Um, so they have a certificate of compliance request in for one of their file numbers, uh, 164591, which is the main filing for the subdivision, um, kind of as a package deal. Um, the conditions that I had flagged that remain outstanding. I gave the numbers um and a little summary in my report, but basically uh it was signage restricting the use of sodium based deicers. Their engineer has confirmed via email that those have been installed. I don't have any photos or anything, but he says that they have been. Um the conservation restriction that is to go on the open space/golfcourse area. Um we were working on this a while ago. It was left um at the time it was left that EA had updated their form uh standard template for a CR. So I had put it on their radar that they should make sure theirs is updated. Uh accordingly they've done that and given us a revision that's before town council right now for another review. We also have an updated CR plan um showing the limits of the open space um and the bounds that went in. Another outstanding condition was for the replication that was to be done. If you guys recall, uh I want to say within the last year, but I don't remember the date off the top of my head. We talked through that they would do an alternative replication area because the individual smaller areas that were on

the approved plan, some of them didn't happen or some of them didn't succeed. So, uh they went ahead and turned the what was essentially the old manure pit from the farm over to a big wetland. So, they they got going on that work. They said the last plantings went in um July last year, but we don't have a formal report confirming uh success, 75% success uh for two growing seasons. Um last time I was out there, uh we asked for the no disturbed signs to be relocated out around the edge of the whole replication area. I'm not sure if those got moved or not. I'm also not sure if erosion control has been pulled out, if they're done and stable in that area. I also put on their radar that there are two other filings, 164371 and 164483, that if they're ready to be done with the whole subdivision, those should be closed out as well. Every time we come to some or every time we're approached by someone needing to close on a house, all of those tend to come up in title searches. so forth. Closing the whole thing now. Let's close all three filings. Um, couple other lingering items that you guys might remember. Uh, they had a project to realign one of the golf course holes which resulted in a planting plan that was going to um mitigate some of the impacts. We handled that uh via a determination um in 2024. Again, we just need the followup on was that successful? 75% successful across two growing seasons. Are they done in that area? Is the erosion control out? Similar to the replication area. Um, and

then I threw all of this to Ecotech and Graves who have been looped in on this whole project all along. Um, Ecote Tech uh echoed that we need to confirm the success of the wetland replication. Um, Art also mentioned the debris pile we had found adjacent to the 16th fairway um from like a landscaping debris and questioned if that's been addressed since our last visit. And Graves is working on their um peerreview letter and just asked about the status of some crack sealing that was left outstanding and the installation of some of the open space bounds which weren't done last time this was on his radar. Um but the team has said that they are now done. They're shown on the revised CR plan. Um, so I know that's a lot of lingering pieces uh that we're working through, but the team just wanted to, you know, loop you guys back in tonight. So happy to turn it over to them if they have anything else.

Sounds good. And who's here uh for them? Uh, got uh they're raising their hand. Uh Joe Antelis and Audi Osgood are on the line. Okay, you guys should be able to speak. Give it a try. Okay. Um, it's Joe. Can you hear me? Sure can. Yeah.

Okay. I didn't I noticed uh a little different than I'm what I'm used to. I don't see uh some of the controls that I get at other Zoom uh connections, but hi, how are you? Uh good evening to all. Joe Antonellis on behalf of McGill Associates, Inc. It's been a while since I've been in front of the board. Um, I had asked Rob Kappic, attorney Kappic to uh pinch hit for me uh as I moved into what I call quasi retirement. Um, and no longer live in the area, but I am still working as a attorney and still doing work for the McGill family. Um, some of you know me from past appearances and and I see that there are many new members of the commission. Uh Rob Kappic has taken a job in as in-house counsel with a firm and so I've jumped back in and uh I wanted to come to the meeting tonight just to uh say hello to the commission and let you know that I have been working diligently with uh uh Byron Andrews at Andrews Engineering or it's Depit now u to try and wrap up uh this subdivision which as you know was started now probably uh close to 20 years ago. Um, and the conservation restriction can now, I think, be properly um, looked at because we're done moving road uh, bounds around and, uh, changing sidewalks and those kinds of things that were typical of a subdivision process. So, uh, Byron has completed the, uh, conservation restriction plan, which we've submitted for your review. I reviewed the old form conservation restriction which I began working on a few years ago uh with the new form and found that the major change in the new form has to do mostly with tax issues uh um historic tax credits, tax credits, those sorts of things. I don't think they're necessarily uh required for what we've done. So, I've tried to put that back together for you and um basically that's really what I

wanted to come I recognize the peer review is not done. We're in the process of trying to get the final street acceptance done for the remaining part of the subdivision and obviously to get the conservation restriction approved as was a requirement in the original special permit and I think the board knows that we were uh careful and cautious about bringing it forward too early in case we had to move something around. So, that's just kind of historically where we are. I appreciate the commission's uh uh patience with us and the opportunity to just say hello again and uh to try and move this thing all back uh to to final conclusion. And Leer, I appreciate your bringing up the two uh orders of conditions that need to be addressed that kind of lingered out there uh to get those cleared up for you. And uh we're going to do our best to try and wrap everything up as quickly as possible. So if anybody has any questions, I'm here and Audi's here to speak specifically about the um surveying and and uh delineations of wetlands or anything else related to the certificate of compliance. So thank you.

All right. Thank you for that information. Leah, I have kind of one question just looking at your list. Um some of the the plantings that you're talking about um making sure that it's the 75% in the two growing seasons. So, whatever was done in 2024 should have the two growing seasons. What was done in 2025, you're really just looking at uh the spring season to see if it gets to 75%. I don't see anything else in here that specifically around the growing seasons and having the 75%. There's nothing else here that would have to linger unless they don't you don't have the 75%. Correct. like any like a hard stop on something. You mean?

Yeah. Like like you know like what was done last year in July of 2025, you have the fall growing season, right?

And then you'll have the spring of 2026. So that will be the second growing season. As long as you get to 75%, then that works. the other uh the other um you know growing season that started in 2024. So it's again looking at the spring just to confirm it, you know, just to kind of close and check that box and so forth. I'm I'm just trying to see if there's anything here other than as far as the legal and and and as far as you know, getting um town council to finish review. We don't have specific control over that, but it's in process. things like removal of excuse me removal the erosion control. Um again right now that's not something you can go out and look for. Um we'll have to wait the snow kind of melt but that's an easy check. I'm just trying to see if there's anything here

that is like um that could create a problem. So

sure. Um I I think we should be in good shape. A lot is just weather dependent. Um, I can't speak to Jeff Walsh's review letter, but he said, you know, things were looking good the last time we were all out there as a group. Um, but I would just stress that we should really just try to close all three of the orders because this request came in as just 591. Um, and it seems like the intention years ago was that 591 was replacing 371, but if you don't close it out at the registry, it just lingers. So, I just don't want to see them close 591 and then we still have to issue partials for years to come. So,

if we're saying the whole thing's done, let's just close them all. If I could jump in a good here. Um, we did uh submit uh electronic applications for the other two uh COC applications. Uh they were both I just checked today. Someone else in our office made the the submissions, but they were both stopped for some reason. So I will follow up uh tomorrow. Okay. Leah or her office to find out uh what what we didn't get right there to move those forward, but we have every intention of moving forward and closing those out as requested.

Sounds good. Thank you. And the plantings that were done for the at the old manure pond and uh the restoration work for whole 7 were both done in 2024 during that summer season. So should have enough time once we can see them.

Great. Uh let me just quickly go around the commission just to see if anyone has any specific questions on this. This is more of a discussion than anything else. Uh and then we can kind of wrap this up. So I'll start with um and just as an FYI, one of our commissioners recused themselves is actually not on the uh meeting any longer. So uh Jonathan, any kind of questions? No, no questions for me. Okay. Uh Emir, any kind of questions on what we're doing right now? I don't have questions at this time. Okay. Uh no or anything? No questions.

Yeah, at this point. Yeah, I have I also have no questions. It's really It really appears that we're coming to the end. It's just all these Thank you, Leah, for listing them all out. It makes it much easier. So, and then I'll turn it back to the applicant if you have any other questions or comments. Other than that, hopefully we can continue on and get all of these things checked off.

I just want to again just thank you for for your patience with us and uh I think we've worked diligently to try and bring all of this and again, thank you, Leah, for bringing up those two outstanding ones. I don't want to be getting telephone calls about posture releases. I'm sure you're tired of it also. So, we'll like to get them all done and uh we we will proceed with all due diligence to get this all wrapped up and uh and further Leah, if there if town council has any questions or would like to discuss the uh restriction with me, just send me an email and I'll make myself available. Thank you. Sure. Thank you. All right. Thank you very much, Bright Leah. Anything else? I think we're No, that's all I have.

Okay. Did we do we did the minutes, right? We Yes, we did the M first. Sorry. I Yeah, sorry. Long day, long day yesterday, long day today. So, um, having that, having said that, I I have one thing certainly. Yes. Um, so I know I'm supposed to be doing the Lake Quincigamin Commission.

Um, but for the next couple of months until, um, I'm getting married in June. Um, until then, thank you. Um, I have an event on Wednesday. We have a dance class on Wednesday and that's the same day as the Lake Quinn Sigamin Commission. So, I was wondering if someone could cover for me. Basically, until June. Okay. I don't know when the next meeting is. Um, it's once a month, right? Is it once a month? I don't know. That's why I was asking you. I don't think it's once a month. Okay. I think it's once a quarter. So, I think it would really just be the next one. Okay.

I say it's once a month and I definitely haven't been going, but it's I think it's quarterly. Um because I went to the one before the last one. Um so, I don't know if that's okay if somebody can just It's absolutely okay. Um, probably what we'll do is we'll have Leo reach out to to them and ask when the next meeting is and what's on the what's on the agenda and see if they need representative from us. And if they do, we'll figure something out uh on that one. So, that sounds good. Thank you. After after June, I should be free on Wednesdays.

That's okay. Hey, you know, certain things uh you know, there are certain life events that takes precedence over other things. This would be one of them. So, all good. All good. Congratulations. Thanks, guys. All right. Um, thanks for that little input there. Uh, let's, uh, end on a happy note. Is there anything else? Nope. If not, I will, uh, make, uh, I will ask for a motion. The last mo motion, please. Motion to adjurnn. And do I have a second? I'll second that. Thank you very much. Roll call vote. Amir. Yes. Uh Noah, yes. Uh Jonathan,

yes. And I am also a yes. And uh Travis has uh recused himself and is uh abstaining from vote. So having said that, hope everyone stays warm and we should all pray for melting snow.