Conservation Commission - Regular Meeting

All right, I'll call the meeting to order. Uh before we get started, let's introduce everyone on the meeting. Uh I'm Sandy Brock. When I call your name, please confirm that you can hear me by verifying that you are present. I'll start with the commissioners. Travis, I'm here. Uh Jonathan, present. Amira present and Noah present. Uh we'll now introduce staff. Leah, I am here. Jan, present.

Thank you. This open meeting of the conservation commission is being conducted remotely via Zoom pursuant to Governor Baker's March 12th, 2020 order and most recently extended on March 28th, 2025. Access information for the public has been provided on the town website. Uh this meeting is being recorded. Please remember to mute your phone a 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 let me know. Uh please note that uh you will not have screen sharing privileges, but staff can display any visuals per your queue. During uh periods of public comment, the participants must um use the raise hand icon in the Zoom menu bar to indicate they would like to speak. This is done by done on the phone by raising 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 taken 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 this purview need to be addressed to the appropriate boards. For example, road conditions must be addressed with the select board and traffic concerns must be addressed with the planning board. All right, it's 7:04. Uh what's up first? So, our one public hearing is a continuation, so you could take it at any time. We have another one that just wants a continuence and then we have three action items. So, it's really whatever you feel like.

Sure. Let's get the continuence out of the way. That won't take long and then we'll just get right into the public hearing that is going to be on tonight. So, all right. So, uh, pursuant to the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, Grafton Wetlands Protection bylaw, the Conservation Commission will hold the public hearing, uh, to act upon a notice of intent and application for Grafton Wetlands bylaw permit for the construction of a single family house at 21 Mealbrook Road in Grafton. Um, the applicant has requested a uh a continuence to May 5th. It is April May, May 5th. Uh, do I have a motion on that? I'll move to continue the hearing for 21 Meet Brook Road to May 5th. Uh

second. Second. We have a motion and a second. Roll call vote. Travis, you're on the screen. You get to go first. Yes. Am yes. Jonathan, yes. And oh, sorry. Uh, my screen is doing something really weird right now. Sorry, Noah. Yes,

I am also a Yes, I usually have everything in a line and it kind of kind of was all over the place doing weird things. Uh, motion carries. Um, and the the hearing is continued. Uh, next up, we'll just jump right into uh the next public hearing, which is a continuence. So, let me see. Okay. Uh, pursuant to the Massachusetts Wetland Protection Act, the Grafting Wetlands Protection bylaw Conservation Commission will hold a public hearing um to act upon a notice of intent and application for grafted wetlands bylaw permit for uh resource area restoration at 81 Milbury Street. Um, who's here to speak to that?

Good evening, Madam Chair. Matt Marorrow here to represent Wasim Masha the applicant. Um who I believe is also in the call is zooming in on the call too. Um didn't see him in the participants list but I'm I'm sure he's probably here. Okay.

So to update the commission on where we stand um I just recently as of today received the um existing conditions plan from survey. Um our Allen from Echotech went out and reviewed the wetland delineation reviewed the site with me. We added some extra flags basically just to confirm the line. There wasn't any real changes to the line, just more of clarification of where the resource areas were by adding extra flags to make sure everything was accounted for. After that was done, I had Toper Land Survey go out, locate the flags, locate the house, draw in the appropriate buffer zones. Um, my client um has contracted with a nursery company. At this point, he is um he purchased the planting list and the amount of plantings that were on our um restoration NOI. Um those are in storage are being, you know, cared for right now. Um I'm going to have the uh plantings put onto the plan as far as location varieties. We'll have the pallet added so that the commission can then evaluate that. Um, the only area that I had a question on was uh Mr. Allen's report. He recommended an extra 10 trees. My concern with that is I had a certain amount of trees that I was going to spread around for canopy purposes over the wetland and then the rest of the stump count was based on shrubs so that it would act it would basically take the place of the trees, work as a vegetative buffer. they were berry plants um that would you know act as more of a wildlife habitat. And the thought behind that was from what I could see from the original from based on photos I had my own assessment of the site you while you had a a canopied wetland area that is being shown on this condition this existing conditions plan

the buffer zone around it had some invasive vegetation and then just you know general um upland growth like stagorn sumac etc. And what I'm looking to do is is with these plantings that my client has purchased is to um you know add more wildlife habitat value to the entirety of the buffer zone as well as replant the canopy. So I'm just asking the commission if the 10 trees is actually on the table or if I could just proceed with the numbers that I had cuz I I honestly believe they're sufficient. The rest of the um the rest of the the thinking and the strategy on the plan moving forward, Mr. Allan and I seem to be pretty much on the same page.

Okay. Um, Leah, anything else? I know you had made a couple notes in your report. Um, yeah. So, my comments are not pertaining to this plan because we've just received this today. Um, so when I said we've been provided with an initial proposal, uh, lacking a few things, I was not talking about this. Um, I referred to Art's preliminary comments for you guys which are in Dropbox. Um, couple additional questions I had. One, um, are you going to be accounting for the compaction that occurred from vehicles driving in the area and if so, how?

So, as far as vehicles driving in the area, there's no compaction in the wetlands. There's compaction in the buffer zone and the plantings are going to have to be there's going to be an herbaceous layer. So in order to plant that, the shavings are going to have to be removed and the area has to be scarified in order to plant the herbaceous layer. And even if you just planted shrubs, it would still have to be scarified to make sure that that was done. So the compaction would be attenuated that way. Okay. My other question was um I know there were some trees that were uh topped for the shading that was occurring to solar panels. Yeah, that was in the back. Mhm. Um, what is the plan for the remainder of those trees? Because I'm sure they're not

you can confirm this with Art, but I talked to Mr. Allen about that and him and I both agreed it would be better to just leave them in place and allow them to stand as snags.

Okay. Um, beyond those couple of questions, um, my notes for the commission are they are requesting a waiver because they'll have to restore the no disturb. Um, I gave you guys DP's comment that they recommend conditions requiring the restoration to be completed within a certain time frame. um requiring a monitoring and reporting period as well as steps to ensure that the restoration is successful before we would give a certificate of compliance. Um beyond those items, we did have two letters submitted uh for public comment. Um one Matt Marorrow provided a response to um the other he has not. if you want him to take you through those. Um, we can.

Actually, I did provide responses for both and I'd rather because we're gonna have to continue this anyway. I'd rather respond to those once I've presented a planting plan on the blueprint if that's okay. It's up to the commission. Yeah, I I will check with folks, but um my thought was we don't want to go into too much uh detail until um now that you have this plan that we have actually the plants laid out on this so that we have a better visual of understanding exactly what's happening. So

yeah, and I also wanted to update the commission as to what was going on and let them see that there's been progress made in not just a site inspection with our but you know, my client is taking this very seriously. He realizes the impacts. He he didn't mean to do anything nefariously and he wants to make up for it. So we're having proper plans done, everything drawn out. He's already purchased the inventory. Um so he's been putting his best foot forward to make sure that there is movement here in progress. It's just now, you know, now that I have had D's comments and I've had some of Lear and Jan's comments, I'm going to incorporate that the response to those comments into a final revised submittal once we get this put on the plan. And obviously that's fine. I mean um you know you're still in the process of finalizing your documents which is fine. It's it's you know it's totally up to you if you want to come at this point and do presentation of what you've done to to date and just keep us up to date. I have no problem with that. I'm guessing we'll get in the further once we get through public comments and so forth and once we go around the commission if there's any other questions obviously at some point we'll then you know uh continue to the next meeting that you think you're going to be able to make and those type of things. So I I don't have any problems with that. So, let me quickly go around to the commissioners to see if they have any specific questions or um any other comments uh at where we're at right now. Um Noah, you happen to be up on the screen, so you get to go first.

No comments from me. All right. Uh Jonathan, so I'm just It took me a minute to connect what 81 Milbury Street is. So this is the property that had a significant amount of trees removed in multiple iterations and this is the restoration of that. Correct. That's what I'm gathering after just again looking at the just making that's my understanding. Yep.

Yeah. I I was in the last couple I think two meetings that were part of that. So, um I I think it would be nice to hear from a to hear the public if there's anyone from the public that has comments uh when we go get to that point, but also it might be nice to to get this is the first I didn't miss a meeting that this was a continuation of. So, or it was a continuation of a a continuity meeting. This

this is the first time I'm presenting Commissioner Correct. Okay. So, that's what I'm understanding. So, maybe for I guess my my opinion on the two letters that we received or the two um pieces of information from the public is that we might want to go through those at least to understand what it seems like you provide a response to one but not to the other. If you have, it's not in our files yet or it's in process or whatever. But it might be good because those could prove to be part of potential um conditions andor some other component depending on what the actual request or the the feedback is. So I' I'd like to see them in this presentation unless that's something that we cannot do. Sandy, I I open

Oh, no. it it it's these are written comments and they're in the um they're in the record so we absolutely can discuss them. I you know it's up to the applicant to see if they're ready to respond to them and so forth. So um again those are absolutely something we can talk to them talk to those tonight. Yes. Yeah. That that's my I guess my only after again trying to connect the dots here. I remember the the couple of meetings that we talked to the homeowner um about what was going on. But this is the first meeting about the restoration. So I think that being said, I'd like to

to after we go through the commission or whatever the next step is, I'd like to to see those uh I'm looking at them on my screen from the the information that we have. But to to kind of go through them with the with the group might be helpful in my opinion. That's all. Uh no problem with that. We can definitely hit on both of these. So, Amira, do you have any questions or comments at this point?

Um, no. I I echo Jonathan's statements. Um, I also like I've been on all of the calls where we've talked about this, but I also feel like I'm kind of like feel like I missed something. Um, so I think it would be it would be great to respond to the comments that folks uh put forth and um could the uh I'm sorry, what was your name? Was it Matthew? Matthew, call me Matt. Matt's fine.

Okay. Matt, could you repeat what you said about the the trees that were recommended in that area? So, I did spell out a pallet of trees, um, I want to say about 15 of them, um, being scattered around the wetland area. Um, and the remainder of them, there's like 72 shrubs planted throughout the buffer zone with a herbaceous layer bottom that would essentially be like uh your your upland your your standard upland meadow mix from New England wetland plants. Um this would the the shrubs are intended to actually establish a habitat um an extra habitat kind of like to jumpstart habitat for like you know small rodents, birds etc as the growth matures.

Um the other part of it actually goes to I believe one of the comments if I recall um was on invasives management. So the other thing is I noted that there was invasives present. There were remnants of a lot of invasives scattered throughout the buffer zone um multifllora rose especially. So part of the management on the regrowth is to continue to monitor and cut out the invasives that come in there. So that's going to take you know manual labor to make sure that those stay cut out. Um Mr. Allen had recommended the addition of 10 trees. And honestly, I as much as there were trees removed, there was a lot of trees based on what I could see um on from the inventory and from historical photos that I did find. Um I think the shrubs going out in the outer part of the buffer zone will be a better mix. keep more of the trees and the the more concentrated plantings within the 25 ft zone um to reestablish the canopy around the wetlands. And all this is going to take time to regrow in. You know, you you can't replace a mature force with a mature force is just not logistically feasible. And to actually do that kind of work is not only monumental, it would it would be like it would be very damaging honestly with the amount you'd have to put in in one small spot. So,

and could could you remind me how many trees were originally there? Like how many trees were cut down? The stump count, if I recall correctly, was like 73. Okay. And the So, I'm proposing that is that's the tree count. So, what I'm proposing is 15 tree replacements and 72 shrubs. So, we're actually increasing the total count plant count by about I don't know 15. Okay. Um, yeah. I don't know. I mean, from I I don't really have any other questions. I just I feel like that that's a lot of trees. Yeah. That aren't being replaced.

Yeah. So, I have a follow-up question to that is when you say that number of trees, is that trees within the wetlands delineated wetlands or is that trees within the wetlands in buffer zone? It's trees in the buffer zone.

Okay. So, it would be helpful to try to identify uh the location of those. Obviously, there's the function of those trees and how it shades the wetlands, you know, some of the things that Art mentioned and things like that. And then there's, you know, what's in the buffer zone and what's, you know, what will help protect. Obviously, our concern is the health of the wetlands and restoring the wetlands. So, um I think having a plan would be very good and it would be even helpful to and again I know you can't do this super accurately is since you have the uh you know the site plan now and maybe through aerial photos is is to generally unless they located the stumps is to generally show where those 72 trees were just so that everyone understands where they are and so forth. So that you know when we're looking at a restoration we want to make sure all of the functions of the wetlands is res are restored and that um they're protected from the and through the buffer and the plantings there. though.

Absolutely. I mean, the Madam Chair, the whole point of my visit for tonight was to make sure that the commission was updated so that they could see there was like real progress being made. Um, and all this getting this stuff together does take time and my client wanted to convey that he was being serious here and putting a serious effort in. Wanted to show you guys that he wasn't just dragging his feet. Yeah, appreciate that. Did you have anything else? No further questions at this time. All right. Uh Travis,

um I had some comments, uh quickly. I think it's important to point out the stumps are probably going to respout. I think there were red maples out there. Those will certainly respout along with any shrubs. You're essentially coping the trees. So the seed banks all is full of all sorts of stuff. So

agreed. And that's one of the reasons why I didn't want to over stuff it with replacement trays because I don't want them to crowd in and get out competed. Regarding the size of the trees, I think an initial plan showed B&B trees. I don't think that makes any sense because you're going to have to go in there with equipment to plant those and the site's going to be full of roots. So, I just I think that's kind of unnecessary. Even 5 10 gallon container trees I think will be hard to plant. I like the idea of installing bare root shrubs to provide that secondary successional habitat which in New England we don't have. So we actually have an opportunity to create a new habitat here while the site regenerates and becomes a mature forest which it will in I don't know 15 20 years. So there's that. Um, I think what's more important in the next plan that we see or the or the official plan that we see is some sort of a monitoring plan with like a logical methodology to determine what what's out there. Is the site actually rejuvenating with non-invasive species? What's the plan for maintenance and removal of the invasive species? I'd like to see that in writing more than like one or two items, line items in a plan. I don't

That's why. No, that's excellent. That's a great idea.

I'd like to see some sort of numbers like we're gonna here's the methodology for we're going to do one or two transexs through the site to figure out what's out there now, what's out there next year and the following. And if it's less than 85% or 90% then we'll do XYZ. So, for me, I think that's more important than focusing on the number of trees that are replanted or the size of the trees because the site's going to fill in. Those red maple stumps will probably be as tall as a bare root or a B&B tree in a couple years. So, but it will look messy. It's It's not going to look like a woodland for the next It's going to take quite a while to rejuvenate, which Matt, I think you mentioned,

which the only thing my opinion though, my opinion is that that's not necessarily a bad thing from a habitat value standpoint. So, those are my initial thoughts on this site. Right. Thanks, Travis. Back to you, Sandy.

Yeah. Yeah. Um, Matt, any other followup to those comments? Well, the only thing is that with the only concern I have and somebody in one of the comments mentioned bare root trees, the only thing I'm worried about with bare root trees here is particular types of soils out there. Um bare root trees, you can't buy them in any hearty components. They're not going to survive. Um the trees that we're having are 1 and 1/2 in calipers um and 1-in calipers. Those will survive. Um, there are areas that we'll be able to plant around the stumps that will allow them to thrive and not get crowded out. And again, going to the commissioner's point, there are a lot of red maple stumps out there that will start regenerating on their own. So, I'm trying to account for all those dynamics at the same token. And honestly, the the last set of comments that I heard from the commissioner, it he's kind of we're kind of thinking along the same lines. We just seem to be expressing it a little differently.

Yeah. So, I I've planted probably hundreds of thousands of bare root trees in my career, and they always do better than container stock unless you can water them in. And I don't think it's fair to make the homeowner go out there and water them in. So, that's my thought on bare root versus container stock, especially if you're looking at shrubs. So,

but I'm from the Midwest, so maybe it's different out there. but you also have more uh more background, more education on on wetland plants than the the rest of the commission. So, appreciate your input, Travis. So, um so Leah, as far as um I think it would be appropriate if you know, we we do have two letters that um were submitted to us. I will read them in, but I'm wondering if those people happen to be um in the audience and if they want to um you know have any comments on those letters. Otherwise, I'll read them in. Why don't you go ahead and start? I got to see if any of the names match.

Okay. So, as been mentioned a couple of times, we've got two I I'll call them communications, one by email and one by a post on uh the website. Um, so again, I I will give you this information and yes, I will read the whole thing in for the public record. Um, so this is uh uh dated March 18th uh to the Grafton Conservation Commission. I'm writing as a resident living directly across from 81 Milbury Street. I have lived there for many years and have been deeply impacted by the recent unauthorized removal of approximately 70 trees uh at that property. While I understand a restoration plan is being discussed, I want to uh formally state the current condition of lot filled with stumps and debris, a significant eyesore that has completely stripped away the natural character and privacy of our street as you review the restoration plan for the April 21st meeting. I respectfully respectfully ask the commission to require uh substantial screening. Uh that plan includes mature uh native evergreens like white pine or cedar to provide year- round visual buffer rather than small decision shrubs. Uh timely cleanup. A strict timeline for removal of the remaining stumps and debris currently uh clutter the front of the property. Survival guarantee required that the property owner replace any new plantings that do not survive. uh a requirement uh that the property owner replace any new plantings that do not survive the first two seasons. Um thank you for protecting local uh environment and interests of the neighbors who have lived with these changes every day. Um and that was sincerely Nancy Leon and she's at 82 Milbury Street. Okay, so that's the first letter. I'm going to go back and uh look at the other letter.

The second letter um is uh was uh uh they used our portal to connect with uh the commission and it was done by Shannon Feland. I apologize if I mispronounced your last name and it's regarding this site. Uh I am submitting a public comment for the restoration uh project at 81 Milbury Street for the hearing on March 17, 2026. Um I'm glad to see that the wetland buffer area will be restored. Two specific comments. Notice that perennial ryrass is proposed to be used although its common erosion control to perennial ryrass is not native to mass and can become weedy. I would like to suggest other uh native grasses to be used instead. At a starting point, the Mass Department of Transportation has a native uh seed mixes that are designed for slope erosion control and many companies such as Earth Seeds and New England wetland plants have seed mixes, seed mix recommendation, especially for wetlands. I'm happy to provide a contact for the uh this information. Secondly, the plan includes installation of bald and burlap trees. I have heard from multiple certified arborists and from instructors in my classes that trees have a better chance of survival. They planted as small as possible even bare root. Uh they will grow much faster and stronger and require less water to uh get started. Uh trees uh should equally be bare rooted or less than 1 in caliper. If larger trees are used, they should be requirement in the in the plan that tree bags or other watering system be uh put in. if they are not close enough to the stream. Otherwise, the installation may have to be redone. The plan should also require that all that the trees and conservation seed mix components are straight species, non-cultivars, and not treated with

Yeah. Neon. Uh, okay. Uh, neo n i o t i n o i ds. I'm sure can say what that is. I am not going to butcher that particular uh word. You're doing great, Sandy.

Which can remain in uh woody woody plants, woody plants in surrounding soils for years. Small trees and probably even shrubs should be protected with small wire cages that can be removed when it gets big enough. One last general comment is that I would like to confirm that uh no public funds from the town of Grafton are proposed to you be used to uh pay for the restoration and efforts for the plantings. Um and that's pretty much it and just uh salutation. Thank you Shannon. Uh the one thing I can respond right to that is there are no public funds being used as part of the restoration. the the the uh participation by the town is through the conservation commission. Um and even the peer review is paid through uh the applicant. So there's no um if I'm correct on that, Leah, uh no money coming from our budget. So

correct. Okay. So those are the two here. I don't know le Lee if anyone's uh um in the audience for that that have made this. I mean um I would be making a best guess there is a Nancy without a last name but if she wants to talk she can use the raise hand um but you know no pressure

and that's fine and again I think you know um this will be this particular hearing will be continued um and uh the applicants uh consultant will reply more specifically for this as far as um a as far as the um kind of information and requests in those two um comments on this. There's a few things that you know there are certain things that we know we will be doing. You know as a as an example timely cleanup you know cleanup is one of those things where it's it depends upon what what you mean by cleanup but there will be a a schedule for what's going on. survival guarantee any type there's a restoration there is uh time um there is a requirement based on how many growing seasons that those plants have to actually survive there's a certain percentage of it and you talked we heard a little bit of that today um and that uh from the regulations it's uh two growing seasons uh we'll have discussions on making sure that there's a schedule as requested by DP that, you know, we we want to not just do a a two season, we want to make sure that the ultimate goal is to have the restoration of that wetland system. Um, and so that what's that's what we'll be concentrating on. Um, those are the kind of straightforward ones. Um, uh, substantial screening, that's a little bit of a different issues. um when you're talking about white pine or cedar, those are not wetland plants and I don't know how well they would um be incorporated into uh a system for wetlands. We can have those discussions u in more depth. Um and again, if people who have written either one of these letters, if you want to uh please raise your hand and we'll be happy to um listen to anything else you have to say.

Um we'll just note that uh these are part of the records. So these are things that we will uh discuss in in more detail especially once we get a plan that has all the plantings on it and and that shows a little bit better understanding of what the impacts were and what the kind of restoration plan is. Um and then we we'll take it from there. And also to let you know that we do have a peer reviewer who's a wetland scientist who's helping us as far as um certain components of that restoration plan and making sure that um we have a successful kind of restoration going on. All right. Anyone raise their hand or we're good to kind of keep on going?

Nothing from the public.

Okay. And again um you know uh submitting uh you know uh written comments is great because that becomes part of the record. Uh we will respond to all those uh type of written comments. Um and you obviously have every right if you want to is attend any of our meetings and certainly participate and ask further questions. We are not going to be finished tonight. That's pretty straightforward. Um the applicant has come back in front of us because they've made progress in some of the things that we were originally looking for and probably um couple key items is having a plan. having a plan with plantings on it um and showing what uh where all the stumps were and those type of things is is kind of critical to this process. but also kind of talking about how there's going to be some sort of schedule to ensure that the not only the vegetation but you know the wetland system is restored and that it's not going to happen in one season or two seasons um but it's going to happen over time and also just to make sure that we protect it so it remains a wetlands and there is per state code no net loss of wetlands anything else to kind of add to that ramble Uh just one procedural thing. I know earlier you had asked if anyone was on who had provided a written comment. So if you just want to more broadly open to the public at large because we do have attendees.

Yep. Yeah. If there are any uh any members of the public who have any other questions, uh please uh as stated in the opening, uh please raise your hand. It's a little hand icon if you happen to be on the phone. Um, but if you do have any questions, obviously we're here to answer them as best we can. We know we're in the middle of this and we don't have all the information yet. So, um, please feel free to do that. Um, Leah, anything else at this point? I mean, we've got a nice update here, but we still need more information and obviously um Matt and you know, as a consultant for the applicant is has indicated that

I don't have anything else tonight. All right, let me just go around to the commissioners while you keep an eye on uh the public if they have any other questions. Uh Travis, anything else to add or anything else that you think would be helpful? Nothing else right now. Okay, Jonathan. Uh, only to say thank you for reading those in and I appreciate that, Sandy, but no other comments. All right, very good. Noah, nothing at this time. Amir, no comments. Okay, I'll I'll go back to first of all, anyone from the U public has raised their hand or indicated they wanted to be heard? Nothing from the public.

All right. Thank you very much, Jan. And I go back to Matt if there's anything else that you want to let us know or have we kind of hit the things that you were looking to do tonight.

No, actually I'm just going to request a continuous to the May 5th meeting. Um this has been great input. I really appreciate all of the comments from the commission. Um I did write up a response for this that first public comment you read. I'll make sure that Jen has that in her email at some point tomorrow. Um, I also would like to, you know, the the regarding the comment about cultivars with the meadow mix. The the pallet I initially suggested was from New England wetland plants. New England wetland plants does not use cultivars in any of their mixes. Erns seed, I use them, too. Sometimes they do include cultivars, which is in this case why I went to New England wetland plants because they don't.

I appreciate that info. Uh, having had a request for a continuence, um, since there was no other comments and I have no other comments, um, can we just have a motion, please? I'll move to continue the hearing for 81 Milbury Street to May 5th. Second. We have a motion in a second. Roll call vote. Jonathan, you're up. Yes. Uh, air. Yes. Noah, yes. Travis, yes. I am also Yes. Look forward to seeing the additional information at the next hearing. Awesome. Thank you very much, guys. I really appreciate it.

All right. Night now. Good night. All right, we next up here. I need to So, all right. So, that uh we're on to action items, correct? You got it. All right. March 17, 2026 meeting minutes. I've taken a re look at them. Hopefully, everyone else has. I'll put it out there first to see if anyone has any comments or questions or recommendations on those minutes. And I'll quickly go around. Jonathan, nope. No. Ara, no comments. Travis, no comments.

Noah, no comments. I have no comments. Do I have a motion? I'll move to approve the meeting minutes for March 17, 2026. Second. I have a motion to second. Roll call vote. Jonathan, you're up again. Yes. Amira, yes. Noah, yes. Travis, yes. And I am also a yes. That carries. Okay. Um, anything you want to add to the extension request, Leah? Um, I mean, I can do a little recap if you'd like. That would be good. I read your uh report, but it would be nice if you kind of just catch everyone up on that.

Sure. Um, so we had an extension request for 130 and 134 Worcester Street, which you guys probably know more as uh where Discerned Cannabis was. Um this is their first extension request with us. They're seeking another 3 years. Um the property owner had some tenant issues that he worked through um and is looking to get a new tenant in there in the uh near future and finish up the work that was part of this permit. Um the main thing they have left uh for our concern is uh restoration in the back for the riverfront. Um, so they're asking for another 3 years and I am recommending issuing that extension.

All right. Uh, sounds good. Uh, I'll just quickly go around air. Any questions on that extension? I don't have any questions. Thank you, Noah. Nothing from me. Travis, uh, what other work do they have to do? I thought the site was stable. Unless I'm at the wrong It is stable, but they never We had um three I think total restoration areas in the riverfront in the back that they didn't they didn't really start that work previously. Um so they need to do that. But yeah, the the project for the building itself and like site work from more like a planning perspective is nearly all set.

I don't remember this. Maybe it was before me. might have been nothing else. and Jonathan any

kind of a little similar to Travis's question like is this something that they're currently I I thought they had opened just from driving by and being a resident of the town and driving past this because I live over towards Wyman and Gordon and I drive into Grafton every single day but discerned it the it's open or it's closed or is this holding up something or is this just more of a process and procedure for Concom to go and get this piece closed out that they're expressing in a a request to get three years more time to do this. Like, are they open and functioning? Are they still waiting on this information in order to get their CFO and fully open to the public? Because I thought they were open before, but I don't know if that's the case.

So, it's it's a long story. Discerned was open. They're not there anymore. That tenant is gone. Um, so the owner is looking for a new tenant. They're not sure if it will be another marijuana establishment or if they go in another direction. Um, but they're between tenants right now, but yes, discerned was opening was open and functioning for a bit. Um, they're not there now.

Okay. But the the building has a certificate of o again through the building. Not but like right. I just didn't know if what we have what we're waiting on or what they're requesting an extension on is stopping them from doing something at all or if it's just something that will be done as the building takes additional tenants or something like I don't believe we're holding up anything because like you said they they must have had a co to have that business in there. Um but they are they are looking to wrap up the project with us and close out this permit. Yeah, it's probably more to do with other business issues in having something on the title or something is probably what's driving.

Yeah, it would it would come up if the owner went to sell the property, but it's it's been the same owner the whole time. Just a different tenant. Yeah. Um so that's different parties involved. Uh the fact they requested an extension just to finish it at least tells me they're aware of it, which is a pretty good sign. Yeah, 100%. No, I I have no other comments. Appreciate the information.

I I had to quickly do a Google so I could remember which site it was because I sort of knew where it was, but I didn't know which exact building. So, that that was quick search on that. Um, okay. Uh based on that um and the question stuff, do I have a motion to grant an extension for three years for 130 and 134 Worcester Street? So moved. Motion is second. Uh Travis, you got the big board, so you go first. Yes. All right. Noah, yes. Amira, yes. Jonathan,

yes. And I am also a Yes. Okay. Uh Lee, I want to do a little bit on 196 Brigham Hill Road.

Sure. Um and I I got to put Jan on the spot here. I didn't prep her for this, but if you can pull that up on GIS in the background while I ramble. Um so 196 Brigham Hill Road is in chapter 61A. We received a letter um for the opportunity um for the right of first refusal as is standard practice for 61A. Um I have a few notes for you guys on this parcel. They the letter does seem to be referring to both 196 and 196 rear. um because it talks about the house as well. Um which is at 196 um but 196 rear which would be the bulk of the acreage. We actually already hold a CR on this property. Um it's pretty extensively wetlands. Um it's the one that shows up as 29D is what I'm talking about more specifically. Um it is also abunded on both sides by land trust land. Uh so the other parcel outlined in green to the north right now and then the one that's not outlined um but to the south um both of those are owned by the land trust. And then uh if you were to throw on an aerial you can see that access to the house at 196 is through 196 rear. The driveway comes in off of Brigham Hill um and then veers to the south for the house. Um so that's another just feature if you will um that lands on 196 rear given all those things. Um we already hold the CR. It's extensively wetland so no one could develop it. Um I checked it. It is listed in the open space plan as just being on the chapter 61 list. They

didn't refer to that. It has a CR on it already. Um, and it was also on the map that was made for our parcel prioritization project um, townwide. And this one was coded as green, which means it's already protected because of the conservation restriction. Um, so given all those things, I was going to recommend that we not pursue the right of first refusal because it's already um pretty heavily protected, but it's entirely you guys call. Okay.

Uh, and and I'll just ask a quick question. Um, so there's already a conservation restriction on it probably in in you've mentioned you can see from the aerial there's a lot of wetlands and so forth. Does that conservation restriction, and I don't know if this would ever happen, impede any kind of trails going through there? So, I doubt it. They usually have that in the reserved rules. I would have to read it to be sure. Um, it is in Dropbox. If anyone wants to help me skim in the background,

um, we can check that out. We also don't have to make a call on this tonight because I think the window for uh weighing in on chapter land is like 120 days I think. I believe so. It's 120 or 180. I always forget which. Um but let let me take a look about that. Yeah. Uh let me go around to everyone else just so that if anyone else has any questions. Jonathan, any kind of comments or questions on this? Uh no. No comments, no questions at the moment. Okay, Travis.

The only thing might be if it's landlocked to public use or recreation, maybe that'd be a consideration, but it seems like if it's in a CR, there's no reason to acquire it. So, and then one other thought, if they go to sell the property, is there a presumption that the title search will catch that this is a CR or is there something we should do now to make sure the future owner knows? Well, I'm pretty sure that any kind of title search would come up with the CR. It is recorded, so that's the idea.

It is in there. We know it's not like the first ever CR in the town of Grafton and wasn't documented. Okay, that's all. Not to Yeah, not to mention all the wetlands and stuff. So, Amira, any questions? No questions for me. Okay, Noah,

nothing for me. Yeah. And kind of to what Travis was saying, I mean, I I you know, as long as it doesn't kind of inhibit like certain types of of outdoor activity or or allow access for doing something, I don't know what, but you know, just in in regards to uh maintaining the site and if there's any issues, I don't know, from an ecological standpoint or something, but um okay. Um, yeah, I certainly don't have any issues with this one and and and agree with you, Leah, but let's just do a quick poll around um the group and then we can make a motion to, you know, do a letter. So, Jonathan,

hold on. Anytime. Sorry to cut in, but I do you want me to just answer your question from earlier first?

Oh, that would be great. So under um under like reserved rights uh they have forest management, mowing of fields and passive recreation activities. Um construction of a small building as a nature study center and uh installation and maintenance of underground utilities and septic systems in connection with said small nature center. um which as far as I know that did not happen but given that they are reserving the right to passive recreation I would say that covers trails as being okay. Oh thank you very much for that. Um, so I I'll quickly go around to see if anyone has any um issue with what uh Leah has is recommending is to write the letter back to uh the select board to say that you know um you know we don't recommend going after this particular parcel uh simply because it's already has a CR on it. So Jonathan

I I agree with what Leah had said. I don't have any other questions or comments to bring up though, but I agree. Okay, cool. Amira, agreed. That makes sense to me. All right. Uh, Noah. No, sounds good to me. Travis, no. Nothing else. Okay. I I also have nothing else. Do you need us to have a quick vote, uh, Leah, for that letter? Yes, please. Okay. Do I have a motion? Um and so that we can vote that we prepare the letter that Leah suggested as far as uh passing on this particular 61A parcel. So moved.

Second. I have a motion, a second. Roll call vote. Amira, yes. Noah, yes. Travis, yes. Jonathan, yes. I am also a yes. Wow, that one was easy. That's good. Carries unanimously. Uh, looking to see if there's anything else. Nothing else. Not bad. Under an hour. Very good job, everyone. Uh, other than that, anything else we should know coming up?

I don't think so. I mean, I'll always plug Weed Warriors for Jan. She started that up uh last Friday. Oh, cool. And where do you find that information? Just because I do not go on the town website on a regular basis, Jan, it would be on the town website. Um um so if you go to the town website and then navigate to the conservation commission's page, there's a tab on the top left corner um that will have all the info and um where to register there. And then I also have started an email list. Um, so I will keep you all informed when the dates are coming up. Sounds fabulous. Um, all right.

So, one thing I wanted to to plug is um this Sunday, Sustainable Grafton is hosting like a Earth Day event in the common. Um, Noah will be there. I will be there. It'll be fun. Um, Jan, would you have any interest in ha in having like a signup sheet for people for weed warriors? Yeah, unfortunately um well, fortunately the trails committee is going to be plugging it for me there. Um, yep. I had already made plans right before that happened. Um, but yeah, there'll be the land trust and the trails committee there will be um having flyers. Fantastic. Y

that's 11 o'clock in the morning. if any of you are free and want to come hang out. Sounds good. It's funny. I've done uh Earth Day thing in another town for I don't know how many years. Uh cleanup that I just do every year. So maybe I should switch it back to Grafton or switch it to Grafton. But um anything else? Next meeting May 5th. Yes. I don't think I can make that one. Okay. I know I can't uh I I need to check mine too. Uh

May 5th and then the 26th. May 5th I Yeah, May 5th I should be back. I'll be coming back from Florida, but I should be home for it. I will let you know, Leah, if I get delayed or something coming home, but I should be home. No problem. But just an FYI on that. Okay. 26 I'm around, but the fifth I'm not. Okay. Thanks for the heads up. Yeah. All right. Other than that, one last uh motion. Motion to adjurnn. Second.

We have a motion in a second. Uh Jonathan, yes. Air, yes. Noah, yes. Travis, yes. I am also a yes.