Conservation Commission - Regular Meeting

Awesome. All right, I'd like to go ahead and officially open Town of Littleton Conservation Commission. It's May 19th, 2026, and we are using Zoom tonight, so we've got a full agenda. So we're going to go ahead and get started. What I'd like to do is to approve the minutes for May 12th, 2026. I know there were quite a few there, and I didn't know if anyone had any... omissions or corrections to those.

I agree.

Okay. If that's the case, can we have someone make a formal motion to approve, please?

I'll make a motion that the commission approve the meeting minutes from May 12th, 2026 as printed.

Wait, wait, wait, wait. Oh, yeah. No, that's fine. Sorry. I was looking at something else.

Yeah. No, the date.

One of the dates is wrong. So on the draft copy, it says May 13th. And on the agenda, it says May 12th.

Should be the 12th. Well, we can change that. Okay.

As amended. Make formally make the change. Okay. Sorry. Go ahead.

I'm sorry. All right. We'll do we'll do a roll call vote. All right, Carl.

I don't know my guy.

Ed? Ed Fultz. Sarah? Sarah Seward. I? Myself. I. It is unanimous.

OK, great. Let's see. We're going to go ahead and start with continued requests for a certificate of compliance. 18 Pleasant DEP 204-1024. Tim, can you fill us in on that?

Yep, we got Tyler here, who's the property owner. And Tyler submitted a document that I'm going to share here. And it was shared with all you guys, as well as a waiver request for the fence that we talked about at the last meeting.

Yeah, and you'll share the fence photos too? That was very helpful, Tyler. Thank you.

So that's this document right here. And you can see, so the red line is the perimeter of the fence. The 50 foot buffer zone is this dash line. So it does go through the 50. And that's why Tyler submitted a waiver request for this. You can see these are the photos that Tyler provided.

So Tyler, you're muted at the moment.

Yes, I'm muted now. I apologize.

Okay, great. Okay. So commissioners, this is the second discussion on this. I think everyone knows the situation here. Do we have any comments or questions for Tyler? Who's the current owner now?

I think it's pretty clear.

Tyler, I think your narrative was helpful and also the photos were helpful.

Absolutely. I think it provides some insight.

Okay. Tim, do you have any questions on the waiver that was submitted?

I do not.

Okay.

It seems consistent with a previous filing where offense was allowed within the 50 for preventing children from getting into the body accidentally.

Okay. Tyler, going forward, please note that if you need to do anything else to just come to the commission first.

Absolutely. I now have the file that shows the wetland borders and the 50 foot buffer. So absolutely any further work will definitely be brought to the board before commencing.

Okay. Commissioners, what would you like to do?

Do we have to vote?

Yep. They're looking for a certificate. We never issued the certificate of compliance with this and it would need a minor modification.

So then I'm assuming we need a motion to do a minor modification on the original plan to allow for the fence as itself. Is that right? Correct. Yep.

With associated waiver?

Yep. With associated waiver, yes.

I'll second that. All right. We'll do a roll call vote. Carl.

Uh, Kyle Melbrick, aye. Ed?

Ed Fultz, aye. Sarah? Sarah Seward, aye. And myself, aye. It's unanimous. Good luck, Tyler. Thank you very much. I appreciate all you guys' help.

Okay, thank you. Next is a request for a minor modification, 64 Beaverbrook. road um lot one which is dep 204-1018 and lot three which is dep 204-1019 um you'll see that in your packet that was submitted there's um information from dillis and roy pertaining to this who's here to speak to this i thought sean keenan was going to be here to speak this i don't see him right now i think he plans on being here um

I'm not sure if you want to table that discussion and see if he shows up later or if you want to take that on there.

Let's hold and then we'll move on to the draft treatment plan approval for ForgePod, the invasive species control DEP 204-0872. And that also was in your packet as well.

Yep. So if you guys can remember back in December, Dave Barr came in front of us requesting approval as a condition in their order that before they do the method of treatment, they get approval from us. commission yearly um and so the commission said at that point come back to us when you have a plan that was approved by the awarded uh contractor for the work since then um we're in the middle of finalizing or 90 there an mou between us and and westford to basically tie into their existing contract that they have with solitude it's a multi-year herbicide treatment um contract. Um, and so that's what Dave's going to be going over. I just promoted him over now. Hi.

Hi Dave. Um, yeah, we have, uh, Westford has a contract for several years and there's an MOU between the towns, which has been approved by the select boards pending, uh, Town Council approvals on both towns. Middleton Town Council has approved it. We're waiting for, just waiting for the Westford Town Council to approve it also. You had asked me to come back with a preliminary plan for the treatment and what we're for sure planning to do is US Priscilla core to treat Eurasian milfoil and variable milfoil in the areas where it is present. I think we'll use a combination of last year's surveys and this year's surveys to determine where it will be applied. The drawdown for the winter was quite successful so the plants are just barely starting to come up now and we would need to do the this year's survey by the end of the month because we want to do the treatment in the first half of June and they generally would want to do it a couple weeks ahead of the treatment and so the Survey this this month will probably be a smaller area than is actually Growing or that would be coming up because of the success of the drawdown so we may Look at the in each area kind of the the largest extent of either of the two surveys as a to decide where to apply the herbicide. Priscilla core is a systemic herbicide, so it should last for several years. The other main invasive plant species we have is fanwort. We have 60 acres of Eurasia milfoil, 24 acres of variable milfoil and about 14 acres of fanwort. We are thinking of possibly doing a treatment with, a contact treatment of the fanwort with Flumioxazine. We're waiting to hear back from Solitude on the extent to which we might have to delay that treatment. because it might have an interference with Priscilla Corps. We might not have the funding to do the second treatment. The MOU limited Littleton's contribution to $40,000, which It may be that it looks like the Priscilla cord treatment will be about 80,000. So that'd be 40,000 for Littleton. So we might have to just stop there, but we're not sure yet. And so we are presenting both of them to you to see if you had any issues.

Okay, Commissioner's questions. So we've got kind of two motions here, one to approve as originally Dave had presented, but also what we're calling under consideration as well. So any questions on any of this? I thought the attach from TRC, the maps were helpful. Thank you.

Yeah, thanks. Yeah.

um tim does all this seem fairly in line yeah both are epa okay any other commissioners have questions on this nope okay okay so tim what would you like from us at this point just a vote for approval for treatments for this year okay we have someone that would like to make a motion for approval

I'll make a motion that the Commission approve the treatment plan for Lake Mattawanakee Forge Pond for invasive species control for the upcoming season. Second.

Okay, thank you.

All right, roll call vote. Ed? Ed Bolsak. Sarah? Sarah Seward, aye. Carl? Carl Malbrick, aye. And myself, aye.

It's unanimous. Thank you, Dave.

Thanks a lot.

Next, a vote on a commissioner's signature authorization for department invoices.

Tim? This is just an annual vote. Right now we have Andrew and Kyle authorized to sign off on our department invoices. If you guys want to change that up or run it back with the same commissioners, I just need a vote on that.

I would stick with the same commissioners. They're doing a great job. Oh, thank you, Carl.

Kyle thanks you in absence. Okay. I would make a motion that we keep the signatures the same with Andrew and Kyle, please.

Second. All right. Roll call vote. Ed. Ed Fultz, aye. Sarah.

Sarah Seward, aye.

Carl. Carl Melberg, aye. And myself, I, it's unanimous. Thank you for the vote of confidence, everyone.

Excellent. Thank you for your service. Of course. Okay, we're going to hold off on discussions at this point. It's 745. I'd like to entertain the public hearing, and I see that Matt's with us. Notice of intent, zero Taylor Street. DEP, oh, does not have a DEP. Scratch that. Habitat enhancement.

Okay, I'm promoting over Matt and Scott right now. And if there's anybody else I should be promoting over, please let me know.

Hello? Good evening, Scott. How are you?

Good, so Scott, you could introduce yourself. That would be great. Matt's not moving over for some reason.

Yeah, he said he might be a little bit late, but it looks like he's here. I'm Scott Smyers from Oxbow Associates. Representing this project, we filed the notice of intent on behalf of Littleton Electric and Water Department with Matt Silverman.

Hey, everyone. Not sure if you can hear me, but I'm here. We can. Thank you.

Thank you. Do you want to say anything, Matt, or do you want me to just describe the project for the commission?

Yeah, if you don't mind, Scott.

All right, that's fine. Can I share my screen, or do you have anything you want to share, Tim?

If you want to share, Scott, that would be great.

All right, I'll do that. Oh, there it is. OK. We'll start out with this. This is the cover from the Notice of Intent. And the purpose of this project has two components. One is to build a small pond down here in this area. And the other is to build a dry, sandy patch up here, both for rare species conservation mitigation required for the well project, the Trumbull well project. So I don't want to talk too much about the details of the species just because it's all public record. But we have a pond and an open clear area here. So I'll show you some more details of that. Let's see. So this is the pool that we would like to propose. The access would be from down this temporary construction access that was used for some of this other construction area here. So we come down here, go out this way, and then dig down about 10 feet in this area here, which was selected to try to keep it farther away from the wetland over here. So it's just on the outside of the buffer zone. But because it's fairly far away, we have to dig down like I said, about 10 feet to get to what we think is going to be where the groundwater is. And then we're proposing to take, then we've already done some test pits out there. So it's very sandy soil. And we'd like to just relocate that sand to this other sandy habitat that we created for another project a few years ago. So these patches here where it's a little bit low, we could use some more sand and we don't have to truck it all the way out of there. And let's see. The next part about that pond is that, well, wait, let me show you this one first. No, yeah, this. So the design of this is to have it so it has a deep area here that will hopefully hold water, maybe all year long, but if not, most of the year. And then a slightly shallower shelf here that would be like a, not quite as deep, but would hold water most of the year. And then ideally we'd have the water at this level during the spring so it'll be pretty deep and this could be used for all sorts of species amphibians and reptiles as like a seasonal pond that can be functional for a lot of the vernal pool species that we know about in around town and then the planting plan takes advantage of the bathymetry or the underwater topography. So we'd have a deeper area here that we'd have some emergent plants in, and then more emergent plants planted in this whole area here, both woody and herbaceous, and then almost upland species in zone three up along the very edge of it. So it would be stable. diverse and we think it'd be a really complimentary habitat feature in this area and then let's see where's the other one no aha there we go so this is the other area to the north this is near where the proposed where the well is being constructed right here and I know some of the commission went out there on a site walk a little while ago to review this area. It's pretty densely forested right now. It's next to the wetland. But it would be very complimentary to this nice expansive wetland habitat here to have this sandy area after we remove the trees, remove the topsoil, and then keep it exposed to the sun. This would be dry and sandy and a much needed xeric type of habitat. in this area away from any traffic and any dangers associated with development nearby here. So those are the two components of the proposal that we have before you. As Sarah explained, we actually don't have the DEP file number yet, but hopefully we'll get that soon. And I'm here to answer any questions.

Matt, do you have anything to add to that before we entertain questions?

No, I would just say we're happy to do another sidewalk with the commission if they'd like to see the specific areas again with the changing of the seasons. And then, I don't know, Scott, if it's worth mentioning just when we'd potentially be looking to do the work, because I know we have some state agencies involved as well.

Yeah, so this would probably not be until the fall or even the winter at this point, just because we're coming up on the active season of some of the rare species out there, and we want to not do the work during that active season.

Scott, quick question on the sand that's going to be moved over. Does that have to be screened or is all that just moved right over?

It should be. No, we're not planning on screening it. It just be put in a truck or a bucket and moved over by machine.

Okay. Thank you. Commissioners, questions or anybody have questions?

Sarah, was your question in regard to the second

Scott, can you show where that sand is going to get located on your map?

That's the one up top.

Let's see.

Okay. This one. That's for the pond. That's the only one where we're moving the sand.

Yeah, good. And the other one, the second site, already has existing sand. You're just removing vegetation, correct? Correct.

Yeah, that's right. Removing the vegetation and whatever topsoil is there. We're going to expose the sand.

How close are these two sites?

Well, on this image, I mean, it's got to be not too far, like maybe 2,000 feet, 3,000 feet away. Yeah, yeah, yeah. And I will say, I point out this dark spot right here is a quasi-natural pond. It may have been created during the gravel mining operation for decades back there, but it's a good habitat feature that's used quite a bit, and we're looking to add another one like that. You know, you have this pond here, but that's really the tension basin. So that gets a lot of input, but this, this, these are clean.

So too, it's, I mean, it seems like a reasonable distance. It's still, it's still a, a hall for these, but it's, I mean, it seems, it seems like it's, it seems reasonable to me.

Okay.

I mean, kind of at the furthest extent, right. These guys.

Yeah, well, without getting into the details of the species, but I think it'll be the little ponds and the sandy areas go together nice.

Yeah, yeah, I agree. Yeah, I agree. Thank you.

So when you're doing the work, you said there were nature species you're going to wait till almost the winter because of that. How are we protecting them

when you're coming in theory when you're going to do it haven't they already been in or they might have already started to bed in for the winter right well not not in the areas where we'll be working the two areas we'll be working are both upland areas and the the species doesn't use uplands in the winter okay so your transportation in won't have any effect on anyone that no okay thanks

Commissioners, any other questions? So I think Scott and Matt, because we don't have the DEP, it sounds like the commission is in support. And Tim, I guess with their permission, we would, once you have the DEP number, just let us know and we'll put it on as an administrative discussion unless something changes to the plan or to something else. yeah does that make sense tim or no i'm not sure that i follow it so well because they don't have the dep number we don't just keep adding it on to all the next meetings that we'll wait to hear from them when they get their dep to see when we will put them back on the agenda yeah we move them down to the like the bottom of the um

The agenda where it says, like, the continued.

Yeah. I didn't see a waiver in the notice of intent. I'm not sure if I missed it. If it's not in there, can you guys submit one by the next meeting?

A waiver request?

Yeah, for the, I guess for both the work, for the habitat improvement up there, and then also for the accessed by the other site.

Yes. Yes. I'll double check that. And if you didn't get it to you, I'll get you one right away. Perfect.

Okay. So with your permission, we're going to go ahead and continue this for a future date.

Permission granted.

Okay. Thank you. Have a nice evening.

Thank you very much. Appreciate it.

Okay, we're gonna jump back to discussion items. Discussion Lakeshore Drive Parcel U12-14-0.

Yep. So I threw this on the agenda just to discuss, you know, this matter still hasn't been discussed in a joint meeting with us or with you guys and select board. I think Chase had been talking with Karen and they wanted to wait until town meeting was over with to have that joint meeting. But for the time being, I think it would be beneficial if we made the expectations clear before, What are we expecting with that parcel right now in terms of docks? Are people allowed to reinstall their docks if they took them out at the end of last year? Is that area that has been historically mowed and maintained by those abutters, are we okay with that being maintained for the time being until we come up with a definitive policy for that parcel? Commissioners, what are your thoughts?

I would say until we've made decisions, stay there with the status quo.

Yeah, we haven't made a decision yet. I agree. The only thing we can do at this point is just stay status quo. But we do need to either put a timeline on a decision or get it on the agenda again.

That would be very helpful.

Okay. So I guess questions, you're going to let people mow as well in those areas?

So I wouldn't say that the commission is allowing it, right? We're not saying we're encouraging you to do it, but we're also saying that we're not going to prevent you from doing that for now, if that makes any sense.

That's a better way to put it, yeah.

So we're not saying... Don't do it necessarily but we're not encouraging you to do it.

Okay. All right, so Tim, I guess what we do is ask and circle back around. It's hard because we're without three commissioners at the moment for this hearing to go ahead and reach out to the select board to see when the next opportunity is for meetings.

Sure.

Okay.

Just so you know, I just saw that Sean Keenan is here if you want to take up that discussion item that we tabled before the next one. So we have a couple of minutes before the next one can open.

Okay. You want to go ahead and do that? Sure.

Okay. So that is the request for minor modification 64 Beaverbrook Road Lots 1 and 3. And I'm promoting Sean over right now. Where we left off with this was that the commission requested that a document be submitted to show how the proposed change in culvert structure meets the Massachusetts stormwater standards. And so that was provided in your meeting packets. And I have that here ready to pull up if anybody has any questions or if you'd like me to share. Did you promote Sean over? I did.

Yep. He's here. Can you hear me? Yep. Yep. Oh, how are you doing? Sorry I'm late. I've had a hard time getting on.

That's okay. Sean, if you want to introduce yourself again and just kind of go over where we've been from the last hearing.

I'm Sean Keenan. I own the two lots that were separated for Beaverbrook Road, and I'm in the process of putting the cover together to get across the stream that comes from the condos onto the property behind house number 64, the existing house. Um, the original plans had a box cover, which had a full solid bottom and then a removable top. And you'd have to excavate it pretty, pretty deep to put that in and then fill it back in with soils, you know, that matched what, what we're taking out. And there's alternatives now that the cost is no difference, but the impact on the environment is way less. Um, So I'm proposing to do a three-sided box cover, which has precast footings that we would literally set in on both sides of the stream and then drop a U-shaped box over the top of it.

I think, and that also goes back to why we're considering this as a modification in that the net result is actually more in favor of the site as well. So commissioners, if you kind of go through some of the information that was submitted by Dillis and Roy, that will support that as we discussed in the previous meeting as well. Commissioners have any questions for Mr. Keenan?

No, I'm good.

Sarah, one thing that I do want to note is at the last meeting, the commission was hesitant to approve without seeing a stamp plan from the engineer. I spoke with Sean and he kind of wanted to see that the commission felt favorably about this before he spent the money to get that approved. engineered plan stamped. And so if you guys want to make a motion, if you're feeling good about this, if you want to make a motion to approve the modification contingent on a stamp plan being provided to Lauren and I, that could work.

so my tim my only reservation would be that for the actual public hearing for this project i did have to recuse myself because i'd missed two meetings so i didn't vote on the actual order of conditions so i probably shouldn't vote on um this change even though it is kind of minor um but then if i recuse myself we no longer have quorum to vote

And that's understandable. We appreciate your transparency with that. So, Sean, you're hearing this kind of live. So it seems as though you have the general support of the commission. and it would be requested that you have that plan done. Unfortunately, we don't have enough to vote on it tonight, but it sounds like you do have the support of it. We meet again in two weeks.

Okay, great. I appreciate that. It's going to take three to five weeks just to get that engineering done from Lamar. So it's not something I could have just popped in for this meeting, but I just wanted to, before I spend the $3,000 to have them design it, I just wanted to kind of hear from you guys that I'm going on the right path here.

Okay.

Appreciate it. Thank you.

Thank you. Have a nice evening.

You too.

Okay, it's now 8.03. We're going to go ahead and open up the public hearing. Notice of intent, 359 King Street, DEP. Nope, no DEP number. Okay. Site redevelopment. Who would like to speak to that?

Good evening. Mark Arnold with Goddard Consulting here on behalf of the applicant, Dwight Long. I believe there should be others in the wings. One would be Reagan. Yes. And then Dwight Long. I don't believe Sean Malone is joining us tonight. And then I'm not sure if Joe...

I don't see Joe. I don't believe Joe is joining.

Perfect. If Reagan and I are here, that's the presentation team.

And Dwight should be here as well.

Yeah, I am here. Yeah, that'd be great. Excellent.

Okay.

Thank you so much. So this is Mark Brown with Goddard Consulting. Here with me is Reagan, our landscape architect, along with Dwight Long, the applicant. This is for DEP 204-1035. The DEP number was issued this afternoon, and I will be discussing those comments as part of my presentation. So just to give a quick background here of the project, I'm going to share my screen. Oh, Looks like I have a settings issue, apologies. So this project has some history with the commission in terms of the an enforcement matter that occurred last year. So just to bring the commission back to the background of the site had a field in the back with mature red maple trees that were in the buffer zone to boarding vegetative wetlands. There was an enforcement matter issued by the commission. We issued a restoration plan. There was further discussion and we also told the commission we were working on a notice of intent and wanted to fold that restoration plan into that. So the intent of this notice of intent is to rectify that enforcement matter in terms of creating a firm plan approved by the commission with an order of conditions that actually requires all the restoration work to be completed and appropriate to address that enforcement matter but also allow for other activities to be approved by this commission the um probably as a whole I think uh can you now see the screen Great. So it's going to be called Bluebird Farm. It's also going before the planning board. Just a quick reminder, aerial-wise, we have a wetland system that comes through the middle here. There's a wetland system that traces along the side here. We have an isolated wetland in the middle of the field. And then you can see here the field. And you can kind of see a little bit of the trees here, even though it's not leafed out in this aerial photograph here. Large scale layout here, just from a survey standpoint, here is the property itself. You've got an existing single family house up here, a barn back here, a barn here, gravel driveway, gravel driveway down to this bridge here. Wetland systems coming off of different routes here, coming down here. There's a little bridge right down here. Wetland here goes into the field here. There's an isolated wetland in here. You've got your 100-foot and 50-foot buffer zones, red and then blue. This isolated wetland was looked at by the conservation agent with Andrew from our team who did the delineation to determine if that was still actually isolated or if it was BBW, and it was reviewed in the field to be determined to be isolated vegetative wetlands. In terms of, so that's the existing conditions. Again, we'll address the enforcement orator as well as part of Reagan's presentation on the landscaping, which you'll see is quite robust in the back of the property to provide robust restoration there. The activities proposed on the property is to tear down the existing barn that's in the back here, construct two units here, convert the existing barn here into another unit, and also convert the existing front house into another. to additional units using the existing gravel driveway. We're creating a roundabout parking area with additional parking spots, driveways to these two new units here. Those units will be serviced by a common septic system that is located here. And we'll also have stormwater management with infiltration systems located in the rear of these two units here, Unit 2 and Unit 1. There is a proposal to use a paver system along this back of these units here. and that's to basically convert the existing gravel path to kind of a paver system so that way it's more walkable usable and also less erosive we have a raised garden bed system here that's allowed for communal gardening in the back and and maintaining the existing gravel road that comes down here to the back fields. So this is the actual limit of work right here that comes down through here, snakes around and comes up through here. So we do have some work inside your 50 foot buffer and that is basically work inside this existing gravel pad area behind this barn here. We do have a small conversion of gravel to this paver system inside your 50 foot right here. everything else is outside the 50 and inside the 100 foot which is basically this unit here the back deck patio and then a little bit of this deck patio here and this infiltration system there uh let's see i've got just make sure there's nothing else so this is the utility plan so you can see this is the except the system septic system here it'll be outside um the buffer zones entirely and That is the proposed work. And then this is just a quick graphic of what's happening inside your jurisdictional areas in terms of the work there. I think they missed this little section right here where the pavers are. But this is basically what's kind of disturbed in general in terms of your buffer zones here. So there's no work proposed in the back of the property. Inside the plan set, there was included a conceptual plan, this plan right here. This is only for a zoning proof to show how many units could be built if you built a big roadway and everything else and complied with zoning requirements. It's basically to demonstrate whether or not that could be done, and then we're allowed to do a cluster development by bringing everything to the front. And this allows us to keep the back of the property and maintain the back as an existing agricultural field. Those are the proposed activities. And then I'm just going to quickly walk through the DEP comments that were issued. So the DEP asked that the applicant should provide additional information regarding the original riprap placed within the stream near flagging C25, C27, D1, D7. So that's this area right in here. It's not really riprap per se. It's been stone that's been placed there partly because this is a town drainage that comes off here. So I think the commission is familiar with that. And it comes off fairly fast and erosively. And so the stone was placed here historically. It wasn't recent. Mainly just to keep kind of erosive there. And although it's hashed like riprap, it's very vegetated in there as well. So it's not really a rip-rap section per se. I think that was just a little bit of misunderstanding of understanding the actual physical conditions on a field that DEP had, but it was a good comment by them. They also asked about The information about the stream crossing, it appears the portion of the field closest to C-13C soon is mapped as a wetland resource by MassMapper. So again, they're just asking about the delineation, making sure that it's accurate. We did walk, I know, the isolated vegetated wetland with the agent previously. Basically, we've done pretty extensive soils throughout this area to confirm information. whether or not wetlands extend into different areas there. But basically, based on our soils, we believe the delineation is accurate there. And again, if the Commission wants to discuss that in the field further, that's definitely up to your discretion. The Commission, there were two comments also asked about some stormwater comments. They were about standard four in terms of volume calculations and also about TSS removal. And also told, I mentioned the Commission can consider incorporating the O&M in the stormwater report as a special condition in the order of conditions. So I did speak with our engineer today. He basically said that the comments are pretty routine. He could definitely get those addressed in a revision of the stormwater report to address those comments. And again, we intend to respond to these comments in writing for the record and also DP so that they are aware of what we presented here tonight. So that's a high level overview of the proposed project. And then I'm going to turn this over to Reagan to present the landscape plans. Reagan, I wasn't sure if you wanted

your um these plans or if you had different plans that yeah let me share my screen reagan if we can hold on just one second what i'd like to do is to entertain questions from a construction standpoint for mark first before we move into that to see if the commissioners have questions please absolutely Can you go back, Mark, and just highlight the buildings? Are those residential dwellings?

Yes, they are. So you have unit one here. A little bit of it cuts the buffers on here. This is unit two in the side here. And then this barn is being repurposed as a unit. And then there's two more units up front here.

So there's no proposed new barn being built on the property?

No, there's no new barn. Nope. So we're taking down this barn shed building here and then putting up these two units here. Again, this is all within that it's a landscape disturbed ground gravel lawn area here with some large trees scattered about.

Okay. You had mentioned just out of curiosity, agricultural land, how many acres are going to be in ag versus wetlands?

Open space is going to be five acres in the back. You can see this hatch back here, this crosshatch. That is the five acres in the back. And basically it's everything. It's outside the limit of work and a little beyond that, basically. So it's basically most of the 50 foot on this side and then everything on the other side.

Okay, thank you. Commissioner's questions?

Did I see a pool? Or is that on someone else's property?

It's on someone else's property. This property right here is an existing single family house property next to us, but it's not part of the project.

All right. Because the pool goes into the...

This is existing conditions right here. So you can see here's the existing shed barn, garage barn here, and this is that adjacent single family house.

So you're tearing buildings down, but are you also taking down trees and all that?

So you can see here there's an 18-inch elm right here, but there's nothing else in this area here. This is just basically grass slope. The gravel driveway is right here. Over here, you've got some trees down here. These, I think, are staying. And then there's, I think, one or two of these trees over here is coming down. Let me just pull up the grading plan so we can take a look at that. So the trees that are, there's a bunch of trees in the outer 50 to 100 buffer zone right here that are being kept. I believe this 20-inch maple is going to be kept because it's right along the existing pathway, so that can be preserved. There's trees along here. I think we'd have to talk with the project team about which one of these are staying. This 18-inch maple is going to come down, obviously. And I think some of these might come down because of the pipes. But there's an 18-inch elm there. So it's not a heavily forested area. And again, this is outside the buffer zone. So in the buffer zone itself, I don't know if we're actually taking down any trees. I don't think we really are. I think I can check this 14-inch maple here, but we can definitely update the plans to clarify which trees are being removed in the buffer zone. But from my recollections of this property and also this plan, I don't think we actually are taking down trees in the buffer zone.

And the gravel drive already existed? You're not adding that, right?

Correct. So I'll take you back to the existing conditions plan again. You can see here this gravel driveway comes off the back of this barn. It runs through here. You can see it goes into your 50 right here and runs around here. And we're basically maintaining that basically by, we're kind of basically, we're defining it with the paver system rather than having it be a gravel path that can kind of like wander width-wise. So you can kind of see here it kind of widens out and narrows down and will not have a definitive path actually with the paver system.

That'd be helpful if you can tell us how many trees total within the buffer zone.

Yeah, I'll make a note to make sure that we cover that in our responses. Again, I don't think we're taking any down in the buffer zone, but I will double the check with the team.

Okay. Let's go ahead on to landscaping.

Great. Thank you all. Good evening. Regan Andriola. I'm a landscape architect and senior project manager with Lesson Samson. Give me one moment. I'm just going to share my screen. Okay. Can everyone see my screen? Yes. Okay, great. So actually, I just did want to clarify one thing that Mark said. We will be having some additional plantings in the NOI, but I wanted to remind everyone that we did already go through a pretty robust restoration plan that was approved and has since been installed. So just as a reminder, we had gone through this a couple months ago. So you can see all the plants on this plan were approved and installed. It was 129 trees and 43 shrubs that were proposed as restoration for the enforcement order. So moving forward into our current plans, we do have these shown on here and just shaded just so you have the context relative to the rest of the proposed work. But again, these have all been installed. So we do have additional restoration plantings out here and actually out in the back of the field. Again, those aren't in buffer zone, but just wanted to identify that along the back here. We do have proposed trees, you know, all native deciduous. And then if we scooch to the next plan here. One moment. Here we go. So we really have very minimal within really very few in the buffer zone relative to this proposed development. The majority of the trees, as I noted, all those native trees in the back of the property are technically outside of the buffer zone, but that's 29 trees and 13 shrubs on the rear, again, outside of conservation jurisdiction. And then the rest of the plantings, the majority, with the exception of these few little bits here, fall within the buffer zone. The rest is outside. And again, all native plantings. We have identified a raised garden bed here, approximately 20 by 40 feet set on EXISTING CREATED WITH ON-SITE SALVAGE STONE TO CREATE A STONE WALL AND THEN A SMALL FENCE AND AREA ON TOP OF THAT FOR THE RESIDENTS HERE TO BE ABLE TO UTILIZE AS THEIR OWN GARDEN. THAT IS OUTSIDE OF THE 50-FOOT BUFFER. REALLY BESIDES THAT, THE RESTORATION PLAN WAS ALREADY APPROVED AND INSTALLED. the additional plantings within your jurisdiction are very minimal and just related to these small foundation plantings. And again, if we look at the back, I mean, obviously we will have to access through the over the stream and through the buffer zone to get to the back and install these. But again, that would be similar to the method in which the rest of these restoration plantings were installed and with small equipment passing over this existing crossing. Similar to the way the applicant and property owner mows this field currently and small farm equipment is able to go over this in small pickup trucks. So the access would remain the same through here, but all of this additional restoration plantings or screening plantings would be outside of the buffer zone, proximate to this isolated wetland here. But again, there is no buffer zone associated with that.

Okay, let's go ahead and see. Commissioners, any questions for this planting that's proposed so far?

No, I'm good with that, Sarah.

So, Mark, historically what we would do is ask you to put some stakes out, especially the area that is in the 50 that you're asking for a waiver. What is the basis for the waiver?

The basis for the waiver is, one, it's an existing disturbed gravel path already. So we're basically taking a gravel path and putting pavers in instead. Also, it would definitely reduce erosivity of soils by having a harder surface there just to keep that narrow path open. Stable, again, is a very small area, and there's 0 to 50 that's existing gravel. So those are the two primary reasons for that. I think it's just a prudent step to create that. And also, lastly, it defines the disturbance in that location versus allowing it to stay gravel, which can be... which can change in fluid and people add a little more gravel and it gets a little bigger and the paver system kind of creates a definitive footprint that really can't be changed easily, quickly, and can easily be identified on a plan because it's actually a solid object versus a fluid object, which is actually gravel.

So has there been an option proposed to renaturalize that?

We would not propose to renationalize that because we needed to access around the back. It could be left as gravel. But we would like to extend it because we extended it to where it widens out. And again, it just focuses that pathway, keeps it on there until it widens out behind that existing barn. So that way they can use it. Underneath that barn is make a workshop and stuff like that for the farm. So that's kind of the purpose of that.

Okay, commissioners, what would you like to see in order to help facilitate a site walk? What would you like to see statewide? If you could go back to the original plan, thank you.

Sure.

Okay, commissioners, we've got a full night. We've got to keep going.

DEFINITELY STAKE THE CORNERS OF THE HOUSES THAT ARE CLOSEST TO THE BUFFER ZONE. OKAY. OR WITHIN THE BUFFER ZONE. AND THE SEPTIC SYSTEMS.

OTHER COMMISSIONERS, WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE? Okay, when do you think, Mark, you'd be able to have it staked out?

I would think we need at least two weeks, potentially, as a survey.

So why don't we leave it with your permission as this, that when you have it staked, connect with Tim, and then we'll try and see when we can get out for a site walk.

Yeah, that'd be great. And just to clarify, the corners of the building are great. I'm guessing you want the limit of work staked. Yes. And then I heard a septic. I'm not sure if that's up in this area here. It's more than 150 feet from the wetlands up in this disturbed area. That's fine. If the septic's not closed, that's fine. Yeah, so we'll definitely get the buildings, the back deck areas all in one footprint there and the limit of work.

Okay, great. So it sounds like you're going to be pushed off two meetings because we meet in two weeks and probably won't have that done for them.

I think that's appropriate. Dwight, just to confirm, I'm not sure where the planning board schedule stands with this. But I think if we continue out two meetings, that would give them time also to start their process and have meetings and discussion. Sorry, Dwight, you're muted.

sorry um yes that sounds like it'll work just fine okay all right so june 23rd please okay so thank you have a good evening 23rd thank you thank you have a good night okay it's 8 26 we're going to go ahead and open the 8 15 public hearing notice of intent 16 pickard lane cobb pond no dep number control of uh nuisance aquatic vegetation tim You're muted.

Sorry about that. I'm promoting over the applicant right now.

Hi there. Can you guys hear me?

Yep. Thank you. If you can introduce yourself, that would be great.

Sure. Hi, my name is John Barilli. I'm here with my wife, Jennifer. We live at 20 Pickard Lane on Cobb Pond. I believe also on tonight is Melissa from the Cobb Pond Association. Is it possible for me to share my screen?

Yes, and I will move Melissa over as well.

Great, thank you. You okay? Great. You guys see that okay?

Yes.

I appreciate you giving us the time to present tonight. Our discussion is around the excessive lily pad growth at Cobb Pond and the proposed treatment for this overpopulation. What you're looking at on this picture here is a current Google map of the pond. You can see it barely looks like a pond. The dark areas are the open water and the rest is all lily pads. And so this area around here is open because we have an active beaver and that's his lodge. And so there's some opening around there, but the rest of the pond is a mat of lily pads. And so while they control lily pad population is certainly beneficial for the pond and the surrounding ecology, the excessive growth is detrimental and reduces oxygen levels prevents sunlight from getting down to vegetation below, creates a forest of roots, makes it difficult for fish and other aquatic life to navigate through, and also just prevents the natural movement of water, creating a stagnant environment which can lead to fish kills and excessive mosquito populations. We have been at this in our current home since 2019, and we've had at least one fish kill actually about three years ago. And so we are hoping to avoid large mosquito populations. Obviously, we all know the dangers and the nuisance of transmitting diseases from mosquitoes. This water, body of water, from what I'm told from people who live in the area for a long time, used to be a great bass fishery, but as a fly fisherman myself, there's no bass in this pond anymore. There's barely any bluegills, so very little fish life left in the pond. So our goal is to prevent the overpopulation of this lily pads. The, you know, having kind of hiked the area extensively around this pond, the vernal pools dry up that in the surrounding area in the summertime. So it's really important for this water source to stay healthy. And we're hoping that regular treatments will reduce the lily pad population. So our goal here is to stop the aggressive spread. This treatment was used prior to us moving here in 2019. Solitude Lake Management had regular treatments. It was done by Emily Cobb who is the previous resident at this on Ka Pan and she took care of these treatments for years. So this is not a new request, but really just to resume what has been done prior. And our proposal is to use cell to like management again to do a sonar or fluorodone treatments. These would be three treatments over the summer to reduce the, not eliminate but reduce the lily pad population. And the I guess one of the benefits of the sonar treatment that is slow-acting and so there's not a it reduces the risk of oxygen depletion by a quick die-off so it takes several weeks for the Photosynthesis to stop and alloys to to fade so that is our quick presentation and our ask is to be able to resume that treatment and Solitude would do the state DEP permitting. Our hope is to have that treatment start this summer.

Doesn't the water department have a well near Cobb Pond?

Pardon me?

Doesn't the water department...

Yeah, so there was a proposal for that. They were going to use some of the land, but I believe that has been... No, I called them. Yeah, Jennifer said that she called and they're no longer pursuing that well. Okay, all right.

I didn't see it happening anytime in the near future.

They still own land there?

I think the Qualcomm Association bylaws gives them access. I don't believe that. I don't know if they own it or they just have access to it.

Okay, all right. They do land just a short distance away, but yeah, absolutely.

Okay, thank you.

Sure. Any other questions I could answer?

The particular type of lily pad, do you guys know if it's a native variety or if it's like a European frog pad or whatever? I know that's a pretty aggressive one.

Yeah, I can find out.

Yeah, I don't know the answer to that, actually.

Yeah, that's a good question. Our goal is to not eliminate, but just to reduce them, you know.

We'd also like to, and I don't know if this is part of this current ask, but we also would like to include a small fountain to aerate the area in part of the pond. Just to help reduce the growth as well.

Commissioner's thoughts on that? I think the aeration would be great. So you currently do not have a DEP number, correct?

That's correct, yeah. If we go forward, Solitude said they would get the DEP permit.

Okay, okay. so it's a little bit carp before the horse um we can give you some um some thoughts on support it sounds as though we we can go through the commissioners that are here i would be in support of the treatment um we can't without a dep number we can't give you a formal vote um but commissioners what are what are your thoughts on this kind of as we look at it from a cursory perspective

I would think that because it's been treated in the past, that I don't have any problem with continuing that.

Okay. Thank you. Andrew, Ed?

I'd also support the project. Oops, sorry.

No, no, go ahead.

Oh, sorry. I was just going to say I would also support the project.

Anything that's going to make it better just can only be a good thing.

Right. Okay. So that's what we can give you at this moment. You can go back to Solitude and tell them that if they want to go ahead and file for that. It will take a little bit of time to get that DEP number and to get that file, and then just come back to us as that process is going forward. you'll want to be in contact with Tim to watch that time frame. So we historically meet every two weeks. We can start to get you, once Solitude is filed with DEP, let us know. So that way we can start to get you on the agenda. It may get continued until you get it. But once you have that number, you would come back in and present.

Great.

Thank you so much. Okay, great. Thank you for joining us. Good luck.

Thank you. Have a good evening.

Good night. Good night. Okay, it's 836. Continued discussion enforcement order 6 Spectacle Pond Road. Who's here to speak to that? I'm going to promote over Mickey right now. So, Mickey, if you want to go ahead and introduce yourself and bring us up to date of where we are, that'd be great.

My name is Mickey Jensen, the owner of Six Spectrum Pond Road. And I don't know if you have the, Tim, do you have that plan, the restoration plan?

I do. Yeah, I can share that. Give me one second.

Mickey, if you can just bring us up to date, what's been done since we last met and what you're proposing?

So the only thing I've done, so I put the silt fence up, I put the wattles up just behind the sand pile that's currently there now. Half of it's gone now, so we've been working on that. Since the last meeting, probably I'd say 10 to 12 feet away from the existing berm currently. So we work from the front first and then we'll work from the back to try to get it away from the outside of the 100 foot buffer zone. We didn't do anything else because when I met with Tim, he said not to do anything else besides move the sand. So I currently haven't done anything else, any wattles, around the rest of the property yet. But I'm ready to do that now. But I need to move the existing burn back like we talked about last time and put the waddles on the backside of that. So if I'm ready to move forward to move those Those two boxes on the right side, the degree pile on the right side, so I can move the existing berm back to create the new berm that's on the plan here that we're looking at. And I'm proposing to...

Clarity, when you say to move it back, you may want to define whether you're moving it back towards the wetlands or back to where it's supposed to be.

No, it's right on the verge of going down.

Yeah, because some commissioners may not know the site as some of us do.

Yeah, so the berm can... existing right now is right along the top of the hill and the hill goes down probably 30 feet. So there's no way to put the straw wattles behind that without the straw wattles falling down the hill. So we need to pull that existing berm that's going to turn into the permanent berm back so we can put the dotted line there is the erosion control, the wattles. So we put that in and create the new berm and loom the new berm. And I'm actually proposing on the left side, we've got the hand there, proposing to bring that berm further down than on the existing approved plan and on the right side, just to kind of basically trap the rest of the property. So no runoff can get off this property, trading the berm around the whole property from a hundred foot buffer to a hundred foot buffer.

Is that where the concrete forms are right now?

The left side is kind of where the new proposed is, is where the forms are, yes.

Okay. Just so people can... I know we don't have the photos back up. Commissioners, questions?

Before I forget, down the bottom, there's a circle at the bottom top there where a little wash off went down from... Previous, I don't think it was me, but it was there, but we're proposing to rate that out and just have it grow back to natural vegetation.

Tim, on this plan, is there like a sequence or anything here? Like order of go for the site?

We got construction notes.

Okay. Mickey, do you want to go over those with the commission?

Let's see. Let's pull it up so you can read it.

I've got the spinning rainbow cursor of death here.

Do you always read through it?

Well, I think, yeah, because some of the commissioners haven't seen these notes.

This is all construction and breach shall be removed from the site and exposed according to the federal state law. All stock buy materials should be located outside the 100 foot buffer, which that's the pile we're moving. All disturbed areas that are not pavement, roof area, gravel, working area shall be restored with any minimum of four inches of aluminum seed. Grades shown on this plan refer to final finished grades. The earthen berm shall be seeded with New England Conservation Wildlife, that's a berm that we're talking about, mixed with, specified by New England Wetland Plants or approved equal. No construction materials, structures, material stockpiles, or any invasive materials or debris shall be stored on the proposed berm. The construction sequence shall be as follows. Install erosion control and sediment control measures, which that, I can't do that. That's what I was just talking about. The berm has to be pulled back in order to install the straw bottles behind that existing berm when I bought the property. That's been there, I don't know how long. Then it says excavate to subgrade and cut sections, bring fill sections to subgrade using excavated soil. Install building foundation, underground utilities, building pad, utilities include wells, there's no wells, town water, gas, no gas, electrical utilities, drainage, and proposed septic system. Place compacted base gravel for the paved areas, rough grade areas to be loomed and seeded. Install pavement. finalized grade loam seed and mulch disturbed areas and plant trees, shrubs, ground cover as indicated on the plan. So those trees are along Spetsco Pond Road. You can actually see it on this plan, I think. If you go along, yeah, so those green dots there are the proposed trees. That's the last part of the sequence. Seven trees proposed to be along Spectacle Pond Road. Where's the proposed septic system? Down by Speck Pond. On the right side, keep going to the right of the building right there. That's well past the 100-foot buffer.

Okay.

So in the sequence, it's proposing a pullback to do that erosion control before we do any more construction, which that's what I'm talking about. We need to pull back that existing berm a little bit. I'd say at least a foot to foot and a half back in order to install that dotted line, which is all that erosion control straw wattles.

And that's what I talked with Mickey when we went out there after the last meeting. And I wanted to really make sure that we're on the same page as Mickey. After reviewing the initial filing, the understanding was that that existing rocky berm area was going to stay and the wattles were going to be at the foot of that in between that existing rocky berm and the new berm. So if you guys are okay with that rocky berm being essentially pulled out and put to grade with this new one coming in, I just want to make sure that we're all on the same page with that.

How are you going to do that if you don't have the erosion controls behind it? Isn't that the existing berm that was there?

Yeah, just like Tim said, it's just a rocky.

Right, but that's the one that was built on the site originally, correct?

That's been there, yes.

Right, so that's the one that was approved.

Not under this order.

No, no, no.

Prior. Prior. For the site. Before ownership changed.

Yep.

I guess I'm missing something. I don't know why we're moving that berm.

Well, because the plan shows the erosion control right along that top of that hill. That's why I'm proposing to move it. I mean, I don't have to move it. I could build the new berm right in front of it. But the existing berm doesn't have any loom or anything on it. If I were to loom that existing berm that's there, there's no way to hold the loom on the backside because it's just going to go down the hill. Because it's right on the hill. I think you went out there, Sarah, didn't you?

Yeah. Yeah, I'm concerned touching the original berm.

I mean, if you want me to leave that original and just put the new one right in front of it, I'm fine with that too. But I'd have to put...

Commissioners, I don't know who's been out on the site or not.

So, I mean, when I put the erosion control in front of that existing two-foot berm, it's kind of... kind of pointless because the berm is already like a two foot berm.

So the second, how, what's the dimensions of the second berm going to be?

The same thing. It's a two foot tall berm.

I think it, I think it was initially proposed and approved as like a, just an extra layer of containment.

Yeah. Cause I mean, this site's been, been a process and plant for 30, 40 years. Um, So, I mean, that's how it's always been used like that. We're trying to improve it by putting a berm there with loom.

Well, I take some regard with that because in your red hatched area, if you go onto aerial maps, you'll go back 10, 20 years that that area has been encroached upon. So there's definitely more going on on this site than there was a long time ago.

Okay. Well, I mean, I'm, Whoever owned it previously, I think Dan Langstead, we haven't done anything more than he has.

Right. But now that you're the owner and has to clean it up.

No, I understand.

On the back...

If you want me to leave the existing firm, I'm fine with that too.

And so just to be clear, we're going to move the metal, like the conics boxes that are out back.

Yeah, those are on the top right corner there.

So that area is going to be, what is that ultimately going to look like back there? That's in the resource area.

It's just going to be natural gravel after we move that. We don't plan on doing anything with the ground there besides continue that berm. The berm stops where it is now. We were going to continue over to our property line there.

To go over to Speck Pond Road?

Yeah, over right there, behind the existing loom pile. Okay. Because currently there's no berm back there.

So I guess my question with this, because we're under an enforcement order, I don't feel comfortable approving the whole plan. I'd rather work on this on sections to make sure, because I don't think by planting seven trees that is, like, for instance, the planting plan, I don't think is adequate for what needs to be done on the site. I'm interested to hear what the commissioners have to say on this.

Well, the plants are along the trees. All those are outside the 100-foot buffer.

I understand that, but we could ask you to plant in the 100-foot buffer.

Okay.

So, commissioners? Andrew, you're muted. Carl, you're muted.

What are you planning on building there, ultimately?

Well, that's already approved, though. We're just here for the enforcement order.

I agree with Sarah that we could ask you to plant within the 100th.

So you're saying half of the sand berm is gone?

Half of the what?

Not the berm, the pile, the sand pile that's there. I haven't been out there.

Half's gone now, yes.

Okay.

It's not against the berm like it was before. We pulled that back about 10 to 12 feet so far.

Okay. When do you think that will be? So that's stockpiling in the resource area, correct, Tim? Yeah.

Currently, yeah.

Yeah, half's outside the 100-foot buffer now and half's in it. The pile's kind of in the middle of the 100-foot line right now.

Okay. So I think it might be helpful for us to just back up one step and come up with what the order of go is in terms of To give you guidance of what you need to focus on foremost. I think obviously getting in the top right corner, the things out of the concrete stuff that's gone over to get that out and get that cleaned up. Obviously continue to remove the sand that's within the resource area. And in that lower left corner, removing the construction material that's there. That's in the resource area.

Okay.

Commissioner, you guys are fine with this area just being raked out, the stuff that migrated?

Yes, thank you.

Commissioners? Sounds like a plan remove the material that's washed down and get that bottom left corner settled and we can kind of figure out where to go from there.

Okay. timeframe for this. So What are your thoughts so that we know when to, because this is a process, we have to keep following the check marks along the way. When do you think you'll be able to report back to the commission where you are now?

So to move the sand pile, the boxes, that debris on the right, break out the bottom and move the concrete forms?

Yep.

Um, it's probably going to be a couple of weeks. I mean, we were going pretty good in the sand pile, but of course my loader broke down yesterday. So I get that fixed.

Okay. So Tim, what is the date of the, when we go out to meetings, what's the date for that in June?

Uh, June 23rd.

Okay. Can we, um, have a report on June 23rd? And then if you have questions along the way, just connect with Tim.

Yeah, we can plan on that. I'll update Tim if for some reason I don't have that. Do you want us to have a meeting anyways in two weeks? Yep.

And just bring in pictures that show the sites in question?

Yep.

Okay. Thank you.

Do you want me to do anything with the berm yet? Continue it on either side? Am I leaving that existing berm? We never really... You guys didn't decide?

I think I'd rather have more commissioners come out before we remove that berm.

Okay.

I think let's continue with what you're doing, get the site continually cleaned up. But I'd like to have perhaps another site walk to really look at that when you have everything cleared out so they can really see the berm.

Okay. One question. On the bottom left corner, I don't know if you can pull that picture up a little bit, is a retainer wall we have to do? It's out, it's part of it's in the, at the bottom of the.

I'm trying to zoom in, my computer is being slow, sorry.

So what's your question? Oh, there we go. There's a retainer wall, like off the back left corner of the building. You see that there's a retainer wall that comes off and over, then down. You just had your arrow on it. So the back left corner of the building.

And that was approved on the plan?

Yeah, this is the approved plan, yeah.

Okay. You can't start that until you have your enforcement order complete.

Okay, I was just asking. I need a bunch of fill in the front there, and I was going to use some of the fill from the back.

Sorry, where is that located?

Right in the back left corner. You're right on it so much.

Hello? Yeah, right there. I'm right on it. So if it's outside the 100, is it outside the 100 or is that within?

No, part of it, the corner of it goes right through the 100.

Oh, I got you. That's this. Okay, I got you.

Yeah.

Okay, we've got to carry on. Thank you. Sarah, before we leave this, one quick comment. Tim, if you can go up. I just want to make sure when we talk about raking out the washout, it's clear that we're talking about manually raking that out. There's not going to be heavy equipment involved in that.

No, no, by hand. Yes.

Okay.

Yeah.

Sounds good. That's all I had. Thank you. Okay. Just for more clarification on that, when we say rake out, like just dispersing it or like raking out, removing it entirely? Well, you're doing it to remove it. So raking it out to remove it.

Okay, I wasn't sure. Yeah, maybe not a great description. Maybe a better way to say that would be to remove the washout.

Okay, thank you. Thank you for that clarification. Okay, let's see. It's 8.56. We're going to go ahead and do the 8.45. Continued discussion, enforcement order, 8 Blood Road. Who's here? I'm over John right now. John, your name's on twice. Okay. Okay. John, when you're on, if you can just say hello and reintroduce yourself, please. You're muted, John.

Can you hear me now?

Yeah.

So, John, just talk a little bit so we can make sure we don't have that feedback.

Is it working better now?

So you're logged on twice. Do you have a cell phone or something, too?

Oh, yeah, it's right here.

Okay. Let's give that a whirl. Better? Yes. A hundred percent. Okay.

I think I was on the app and the web.

Yeah, okay. So we had some people had an opportunity to go out last couple days. Thanks for accommodating that. What we'd like to do is to kind of go through where we are. Tim, I know that you had spoken with DEP. So if you can just go ahead and start with those comments, that would be appreciated.

Sure. So what you guys asked at the last meeting was if I can reach back out to DEP and ask them about the no disturbance time period rate on the area that was dredged. Because initially they said it should be the commission's discretion on what that time period should be. And then you guys asked, you know, what is what is the EP think? What would they do? And so I was able to get in contact with them today. I spoke with the circuit writer on the phone and she said initially when they were meeting internally to discuss this, they were considering recommended that it be a no disturb area forever. But what they ultimately recommended was that the commission implement a no disturb time period of at least one year.

um from the the date of the um the dredging to allow it to renaturalize so that was the update that i had from from dep to share so the the really the concept is renaturalizing under the water and then okay all right that's that's helpful um so john we had some commissioners go out that aren't with us tonight um i know michael had gone out as well i've gone out So I think what we originally had spoken for at the last meeting, and that's why we wanted to go out, was to kind of look at where feasibly it might be able to put some plantings in. And obviously, it's a tighter lot. So with your wife and I, we had kind of looked at both of the left side and the right side as you're facing the water. commissioners welcome any thoughts or comments about plantings it was interesting to go back because the water obviously the last time I've been is much higher so you can see kind of like that higher water line as well commissioners thoughts on this or direction

I mean, my comment here, Sarah, I wasn't here a couple of weeks ago, but I'm very supportive of the planting idea. I think it gets at the core issue in the lake, which is sedimentation issues. So to the extent that we can deploy planting to ensure stabilization of banks is, What I will say, though, is as I often do, I'll defer to the wisdom of people who know plantings better than I do to determine which ones make sense here. I understand the soil can be a little bit finicky in this area, and it's not obvious to me what the right to plantings would be. But in general, I like the idea of shrubs and ground cover to stabilize soil.

Right. And we saw, I don't know if any of you were watching earlier tonight with the firm, the Weston and Sampson and Regan, who we've worked with before in terms of does renaturalizing of sites so that you can see kind of like examples of plantings and how they work in conjunction with one another as well. Yeah. As I said, when I was out on site, I think the left side and then the right side, there's some opportunity there, especially with that bank that you have, to help put some plantings there, which would help stabilize that bank for sure. And then on the left side, over by where some of the plants were on the property line as well, there's some opportunity there as well.

Tim, did you get that email I sent you with the planting plan?

um let me take a look give me a second john when did you send it a few hours ago yeah we and so that's it's hard because the process is so that way the commissioners can have it to review it as well if he does have it he can show it but just to know that the rest of us haven't seen it because it goes out days ago do you want to walk us through what what that was

It's got pictures and dots of kind of where the spaces are and some different options. With native plants, we went off of this page Lauren gave us, the pollinator page. Great, okay. And added a few other ones. I believe everything is native on our thing that we had proposed.

I just threw it onto a document here. I'll share it. Thank you, Tim.

Yep.

All right.

So Lauren had suggested using the area that we had a wildflower garden last year to replant something a little more sturdy in there. So we kind of color-coded some ideas of stuff to go into that area. Sizes and amounts can vary. The option two is that lower slope area and closer to the water. That is, if you zoom in a little bit, you can see the property line stake in the upper right corner and the lower left corner. So we don't have a ton of property available over there. So I think we only have about one row worth something that we had a few, you know, three gallon or so high bush blueberry and low bush blueberry staggered. I'm pretty sure you need male and females of those. We could, they're just different varieties. And planting that slope there. And that's kind of what our thoughts are. The far side, we can put something there. I just really shady. I don't know if anything would really take super well there.

There are shade-tolerant plants. I think I like this area, the option two, because it could also help with waves as well to help stabilize that bank. I'm not sure. Obviously, this is not my realm of expertise if blueberries are appropriate for that because you want something that's really going to have kind of like really good robust root growth as well. And that's why I would always defer to someone who does that full-time.

I would agree, Sarah, in terms of what plants, but what I see in option two is very much what I envision in terms of restoration because it will hold that bank in place and it will prevent some amount of sedimentation. So whether it's highbush blueberries or lowbush blueberries, I like you will defer to people more experienced, but this option two is much more what I was thinking as well as potentially some plantings, again, whatever makes sense on the other side, sort of as you're looking out to the lake to the left.

Carl, I know you know a lot of trees and plantings. Do you have thoughts on this?

I think the blueberry would be fine. I was thinking, if you're trying to hold soil, willows are always used for embankments. And there's several other species. I can't think of the species now. But there are species specifically that send out a lot of roots. And they're very fast-growing plants. I think that's what Chase was getting to. But I think he really needs to consult with an expert on this.

Oh, what do you think about? Oh, sorry, Carl. I was going to say, what about like a sweet pepper bush? I mean, we have tons of it on our shores and the conservation areas and it spreads and smells amazing and holds the banks very well.

A sweet pepperbush would be fine. It's a marginal wetland species, I believe, isn't it? It's on the edge. It would be appropriate for that setting.

I think it might have a better shot than maybe a blueberry shrub.

I mean, if it can serve multiple purposes, you know, it would be, you know, if the plant can serve multiple purposes, it would be good, too, rather than, you know, if it's in addition to holding the bank.

And it would be interesting if there's a way to put them in conjunction. I think, John, what you're hearing is that we've had success with different varieties, but we really do defer to we're not here to tell you what to plant. We're just here to give you suggestions. I like option two in addition to planting on the left side. Sorry, I don't know which direction that is.

You're talking over near that, I think.

I think.

The bleeding hearts bush that you saw? Yes. Yeah. We could plant something over there, too.

Yeah, exactly.

I just figured this area would be a little closer. I mean, there's no chance of waves ever getting up to where these dots are anyways. Under the waterline is very rocky on that corner. And that slope, there's no real... erosion concern on that slope, there's nowhere for water to get enough flowing to do any damage there. Although it is a rocky slope. We would have to bring in a machine and dig soil out and put loam in there to plant there. It is incredibly rocky soil if we wanted anything to survive. So there's another reason why we kind of gave that as another option. Whereas option one and the other side of the property. Well, the other side near the bleeding heart would probably need a machine as well, but that's a little far away. The existing planting bed is pretty loamy. That would be fine to do by hand.

That's going to be a challenge there because you won't be able to bring equipment into that area. Okay.

I just don't think anything would survive in that area without a significant amount of loam put in there as well.

Okay.

Commissioner? Here's what I would propose. I think, John, you've heard from us that this is generally the areas that we're looking at. I think you've heard that option two makes sense as well as the other side by the bleeding parts. What I would suggest, though, is that you've heard a little bit of pushback on just highbush blueberry. What I would like to see is to have you come in with a slightly more comprehensive plan that has maybe a wider variety of species that are involved and i'd like you to come in with what species you're you would plan that's a little bit broader than that and i'd also like to understand how you propose to put them in um because i'm a little anxious about the idea of getting significant heavy equipment there and i think a tract excavator would be very minimal

No, you can't because then you'd be breaking down the infrastructure of the roots that are already there. So that's why historically on other sites it's hand augers, like the motorized hand augers.

Yeah, that's what I was thinking, John.

You can tear everything, and then I'd be throwing rocks everywhere and soil everywhere. I mean... I work landscape construction. I plant trees.

So that means that you have access to people that can help you with this restoration. As we stated, like, we're not here to tell you what to do. You need to come to us and make a proposal that's going to work within.

I think this would be a lot easier if you just told me what you wanted, or I can just write you a check. I mean, What do we, again, what's this plan?

So, John, this is a process through DEP. So we have, obviously, there is no check that's going to be written, and it is a process. So it's unfortunate that we have to be reactionary. But, commissioners, anyone else have any guidance for the Scotts?

Yeah, John, I hear what you're saying, right? You want to know what the right answer is. We're a little bit tied in that, but I think what you're hearing is one of the things that we're concerned about with a tract excavator is not just what needs to be dug to plant the material, but also plant the plants, but also what impact it will have as you track it over there, which is why we're typically looking for insensitive areas like this. as minimum minimal of a disturbance as possible and we appreciate that you are probably very familiar with heavier equipment what you're hearing is we would like you to come forward with a plan that is as minimally impactful as possible to plant these and that includes probably doing it in a more labor-intensive, lower-equipment sort of approach than you're used to. And that's just what we're going to expect that close to a resource area. So I'm pretty confident with that direction, you can come up with as minimally impactful as possible of an approach.

Yeah, I have ground protection mats that I go across lawns with dump trucks all the time and don't disturb them. I think if you want to come in... I think what you've heard, John... Why can't you guys just tell me what you want? Just tell me what you want and I'll do it. It's just that simple. We could have done with this months ago. Just tell me what you want and I'll do it. I mean, John, what we just told you what we wanted was... That's another professional and another professional and another this guy and another that guy.

All right, John. I hear your frustration, but...

I mean... What Sarah said is, you know, hand augers to put it in. And if you don't think that that is feasible, then you need to come back and tell us what is feasible and is minimally impactful. But I'm pretty confident if you come back with, yeah, we're going to put these in with hand augers and here's how we're going to minimize the impact when we do that, you'll probably get the green light as long as the plants make sense.

All right, then we can talk about, all right, we'll talk about the enforcing order after that.

Correct. Okay. John, with your permission, we meet again in two weeks if you'd like to.

We can't do anything sooner than that with an approved plan to Tim?

We meet every two weeks unless there's holidays in there. Okay. Commissioners, do you have any questions?

What do you mean by professional plan? If I call, I have a plant pro at site one, will his stamp name on something be good enough for you?

I'm not, I'm not familiar with them. So, um, in terms of them working within wetlands and wetland species.

That is, John, I don't know that particular vendor, but that is the kind of expertise that we are looking for. Someone who can say, yep, I've looked at the area and here's what I think is likely to survive in that area based on the soil type, based on the hydrology, and based on the goals. I don't know if that person is qualified to do it, but that's the type of expertise that we're looking for.

Okay. So, John, with your permission, we'll see you in two weeks.

Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. It's 9.14. We're going to open the 8.46 continued discussion enforcement order 2 and 6 Blood Road. We're just going to take a second. We've got to move you over.

Can you hear me? Yes. Yes. Okay.

Okay. So we had an opportunity to walk through and would like to know kind of your thoughts on this as well with your plantings. Hopefully you were able to hear the earlier conversation as well.

So this is Herb. For one thing about John's situation, putting loam on the hill there next to the lake, I think that leaving it alone would probably be better because it's already settled with pine needles on it and there's zero erosion on that hill now. But if you go add a bunch of organic material there or loam, that'll end up just washing out a I would think. I'm not trying to be argumentative. It's a suggestion.

Yeah, the roots might take longer.

And with our property, it's pretty flat down where the lake is. So there's zero erosion. We actually have a couple of spots that are away from the lake, some that are steep that we could add loam to and, you know, it wouldn't erode into the lake. I BELIEVE LAUREN TOOK SOME PICTURES AND WE DISCUSSED A COUPLE OF SIDE HILLS AND PLANTING SHRUBS, BUT THEY'RE NOT DOWN BY THE LAKE WORKS FLAT. GO AHEAD, YOU GUYS.

NEW SPEAKER ROWE.

Yeah, I think this side is similar to what we just discussed. I'm not envisioning us sort of like spreading loam all over. What I'm envisioning is digging a suitably sized hole to plant ground cover shrubs, right, like highbush blueberries. So to that extent, you know, we need to dig a hole. that is of a sufficient size. We need to put the right material in that hole to grow the plant. But Irv, you said like spreading loam. Do you, I, I, I'm not, I tend to agree with you. I'm not sure we want to just spread dirt all over the place. Can you explain a little bit what you meant when you said spread loam and how that in your mind is the same or different than what I'm talking about in terms of planting bushes?

So what I would, If you were putting in a lawn or something and you put four inches or six inches or whatever or eight inches of lawn down and then you could plant shrubs and stuff and small bushes and flowers around in that, I kind of thought that's what you meant.

No, these would be direct burials. So you're basically augering a hole and putting loom and suitable soil in it to help nurture it.

I do have a question, though. We are very unclear on our property where we would even, not that we don't have plenty of property, but as far as planting by the lake where there's no erosion because our beach is completely flat, I'm trying to envision what's beneficial. But again, if you were driving in our driveway going towards our boat ramp on the right-hand side, that's very steep. It has trees right on it. And what we were kind of envisioning is we would sort of box that in using, I don't know, PT or whatever you can use.

Then we would put... Landscape timbers. Landscape timbers, whatever. Any erosion.

And then we could put in some amount of loam and it wouldn't be able to go anywhere because it's going to be boxed in. And then we would have to have some kind of ground planting that can root quickly and can be in rocky, very shady. But, you know, we would absolutely do that. I mean, I want that anyway, but.

We're not opposed to, you know, planting trees.

We just don't want to have to plant something on the beach for the sake of saying, well, we planted it on the beach because if there's no erosion on our side.

It would be more useful in a different area on our situation on the hillside is what I'm saying. I guess that's what we're saying.

Okay. Carl, you were going to say something?

I don't think the box idea works. It doesn't really benefit anything from what we're trying to accomplish.

So I think we also, we've had discussions about pollinators helping some diversity in there for plantings as well as species kind of come and go at times to what can help some of the others through this.

We're actually getting bees tomorrow morning. Beehives.

Yeah, we have four more hives coming in the morning, so that brings us up to seven.

Yep, seven hives.

And we're more than happy to put another two down here. We already have one here.

Commissioners? I think what Sarah is getting at is that we as a commission are open to... We hear what you're saying that planting something right on the shoreline may not make sense with your property. We are open to the idea of doing something meaningful to improve the erosion potential to provide more stability. I'm okay with the idea of, you described a steeper area that is more prone to erosion. I tend to agree with Carl that sort of boxing it in and building it up with loam is probably not something we would be comfortable with, but to the extent that there are plants that you could dig a hole and plant in that slope to provide stability, that's something, even if it's not right on the shoreline, I would be open to, as I would also be open to, you know, expanding a planted area for wildflowers for pollinators.

Absolutely. And I have some pictures that I need to send to Tim and I'll put my comments in where we can control the erosion, what flowers, because we already have 15 steeped beds in the front of our house. So we would be able to add more on a hill that has a lot of erosion. So I will send all of that to Tim with some notes. So we'll be ready for the next meeting.

And one of the things that we're going to look for there is, again, the right plants that make sense for the type of soil and something that will help stabilize the steeper slopes here.

Sure. Yeah, absolutely. That's what we want.

Okay. Other commissioners have any questions or thoughts for the Mathesons?

I think you're heading in the right direction now with following Chase's idea. I think I had said earlier, if it can serve multiple purposes, all the better. If it supports pollinators and helps with erosion and salt, it just makes the situation that much better.

Okay. Any other commissioners? Thank you for joining us. We'll hopefully see you in two weeks. And if you can submit information to Tim, the sooner the better. So if that way it needs any kind of modifications, he can help review that with you as well. I will send it by before the end of the week. Okay, great. Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, it is 9.23. We're going to open up the 9 o'clock. Continued public hearing, notice of intent, transmission line improvements, right-of-way, New England Power Company, general maintenance, and improvement along transmission lines. Allison, I see that you're here. We were out on site in the rain. Yeah.

Good evening. Allison Milliman with BSC Group here on behalf of the Applicant New England Power Company for the Sandy Pontotoc Sparrow Reliability Project. As Chair spoke, we did have a site review on Thursday with some members of the Commission. We went through the right-of-way and looked at the plans. The comments I received back were to include proposed concrete washout areas on the NOI plans, which will then be provided to the contractor before construction, as well as notes that secondary containment must be used for equipment that has to be staged. on matting on wetlands overnight. So I was able to make those changes to the maps. I provided them to Tim, and I'm happy to share if there's interest in the commission to review.

I think, Alison, thank you for that. I think it would be good for those that are listening as well, and then other commissioners, if you can just do a cursory overview and go back to your original plan such that you did at the previous meeting.

Absolutely. May I show my screen?

Yes, thank you for asking.

Okay, so this is the original plan that we had provided to the Conservation Commission. This is for a rebuild of transmission lines within an existing right-of-way. The 337 line, which is the 345 kV transmission voltage line, is proposed to have a full rebuild. So every structure along this line will be replaced with a structure on concrete caisson foundations with a steel pole. And then there's ancillary work associated with the 115 KV lines to upgrade them to meet current standards. That includes overhead work as well as OBGW, which is optical ground wire, which allows for faster communications between substations. There are a handful of replacements associated with the 150 KV lines, as you'll see here. They were based on engineering standards. We reviewed these both in the field with the commission as far as, you know, the need to cross over this state highway here. Temporary construction matting is proposed for any work located within wetland resource areas, and that's what this hatched area is showing you here. Anything that is proposed to be a graded work pad, which is necessary for the larger crane and drilling equipment, is shown in the yellow polygons here. We also, I think this is a good example, we also have some civil design waiting plans that were reviewed and approved by Littleton Planning Board for stormwater ordinance, and those were prepared by VHB, and they were also included in your packet for review. We have a due to the fill associated with the larger foundations for the structures. We do have a proposed wetland replication area, which we visited on Thursday with the Commission. It's relatively small, but the plan is tied into this existing wetland resource. We've provided a planting plan and a heating plan. We also conducted groundwater test pits to ensure hydrology is sufficient to meet the requirements of this replication area. The Commissioner and I also visited this area here. This is Matheson Farm. Due to plowing activities that have occurred in this area, there are mounds that need to be removed, and so the structural placements are shown here to accommodate the removal of those mounds.

I'm sorry, can I interrupt you? Can you go back to that plan and the mound removal? And just give me a little more detail about what you're anticipating to do there.

Yes. So the proposed plan right now, due to the plowing activities that are happening in this active agricultural field, the existing structures are pretty much now on their own islands, if you will, elevated islands. And that's just because of, you know, years after years of plowing activities that have reduced the elevation surrounding them. So the company is proposing to replace these structures outside of the existing mounds, and then they'll be grading down the mounds, and then they'll be providing that soil in cooperation with the landowner in this location here. And because it's farmland soil, they'll be stockpiling it here for him to reuse as needed on his property.

Okay. And... How is that soil going to get from essentially the resource area, the mounds that exist to that field? And I just want to make sure one of my general questions here was making sure that we're not going to create impacts during the implementation of the work. And I saw some places where it looked like there were like all roads or other protection going in. Is there what protection is here while we're moving that soil?

So we do have our proposed sediment controls, which are shown. Let me zoom in here. Okay. So our proposed sediment controls are shown in the kind of, I don't know, burnt orange or brown or whatever you want to call this line here. So we did review this location with the commission at the site walk. So we are proposing sediment controls in this area. as well as temporary construction matting to facilitate the structure work. Where we typically show the construction matting, you know, sediment controls are not usually installed beyond the temporary construction matting due to it being its own kind of protective measure, if you will. So that's what this is. And then we show the sediment control between the grading area and the wetland resource area. And this is an existing... This is Blood Road. If you're familiar, it's a dirt road. There currently are sediment controls in place now for other work, but the company is committing to reinstalling those controls prior to excavation.

And I guess, Alison, let me try to ask a better question. So around the number 18, we're going to dig up some dirt, right? And that dirt is going to be relocated to an agricultural field, assume north is up, planned northwest, right?

Yeah, planned northeast, I would say.

Oh, okay, northeast. Okay. Maybe that's my misunderstanding here.

Okay. So it's northeast of the right-of-way in an area that was approved by the landowner.

Okay. Allison, I think it might be helpful. You had mentioned out on site that that would more than likely not be happening during the peak time for agricultural performance of those fields that you had mentioned potentially in wintertime.

Yeah, I think the details need to be worked out with the landowner as far as his requirements for when that excavation work can happen. Obviously, the applicant... over with the landowner as far as any compensation that might be required, but that, you know, I don't think I can speak to exactly when this grading work will happen.

I think just to, there was just something that was discussed on the sidewalk. So, Chase, the material is And they're bringing in larger poles to accommodate the difference in elevation as well.

Okay. No, I think I'm starting to get it. But what I'm trying to understand, Allison, is... what route is the material going to travel from where it is excavated to where it is placed? And do we have sufficient controls in place to minimize the impact to jurisdictional areas, not just where it's excavated, but also the route through which it will be transported?

Sure. Understood, Chase. Okay. So there are two access routes. One is along existing Blood Road, the dirt road that does circle around and allows access to this area. And the other one would be the on right-of-way access, which will provide a direct connection to this area that was approved by the landowner. This is the soil area. stockpiling area that has been worked out with the landowner. And you'll see it's outside of the hundred foot buffer.

Okay. And so this is to the east of that number 18 that I called out, right? Yes.

This map view is east. Yes.

Okay. Now we're also going to take soil from around 21, right? 21 sort of center of this plan. To the right? Yeah. Are we taking soil from around these?

No, sir.

Okay. Okay. I think that clears it up. I just wanted to make sure that we have considered how things are going to move around, not just the limits of the planned work, but the transportation. Okay. And Allison, I don't know if there are other places where that is relevant, but I do very much want to make sure that we've thought through those. Because one of the problems we've seen in the past is the limits of work define the limits of the finished work, not necessarily the limits of the work as it will be implemented. Does that distinction make sense?

Yeah, I understand. Absolutely. Yeah. As we show proposed, there are existing farm roads that are planned to be used to haul the soil, where work is proposed within the agricultural field. The applicant's proposing temporary construction matting or flat mats to the farm. But with cooperation with the landowner, there will be availability to use his existing farm roads to haul the soil.

Okay. Thank you for clarifying all that.

You're welcome. Shall I move on?

Yes, please. Thank you.

Okay. You're welcome. Okay. As presented at the last public hearing, BSC did on behalf of the applicant go out and proactively identify vernal pools, which were not necessarily certified, but potential. And we assessed those last spring for vernal pool activity. And we did identify, I think, two locations here, which I'll show the commission here. There's one here. Vernal pools are shown on the purple here. So there's one small isolated vernal pool that's adjacent to a VHB-designed access road, so we're proposing the sediment controls. You will see that there is no proposed impact within that envelope. And the second one is shown here, which pretty much crosses the entirety of the right-of-way. As such, we've proposed to map the narrowest part of the field-identified vernal pool along the northernmost part of the the right of way. So that's shown here. And there's also sediment controls proposed the approach to this area here.

Allison, are you proposing, given the proximity to vernal pools, are you proposing any time of year restrictions on this work?

So that did come up at the initial hearing. I think if there would be a request from the commission to a condition time of year, I would need to run that by the applicant, mostly due to the fact that, considering this is a transmission line project, they do have outage and non-reclosure requirements for certain activities due to energized high voltage lines. So if that's a request that the commission would like to be considered, I would bring that back to the project team to look at outage and NRA schedules and see if that's feasible. Then we walked, this is Beaver Brook Road. There's some proposed new switch structures, which we discussed in the field. The purpose of those is to sectionalize lines, allow for de-energization of segments of lines during emergency and maintenance response procedures. So that's these new structures that are being proposed here right outside of Littleton Municipal Substation. So those are the new kind of, I will say, facilities that are being proposed by the applicant. So this is it for the plans that I had submitted to the commission, and then as far as addressing comments, did the new plan come through? Are you all seeing this now where it shows proposed concrete washout?

Yep. Yep.

Okay. Thank you. So during the site walk, it was requested that we update our site plans to provide better direction to the contractors who will be performing the work. The first one is that secondary containment will be used for any equipment to remain overnight matting place in wetlands. We discussed the fact that the larger cranes, drill rig equipment as such is infeasible to remove from the matting on a daily basis. So we will be requiring secondary containment as well as I've identified some proposed concrete washout areas as we had talked about, to be reviewed and approved by the contractor. For the most part, I tried to put them as far away and in an area that the concrete trucks can egress and ingress without kind of bottlenecks, if you will. So these are shown, you know, there's one here now. I have one shown here, the outsider resource areas. One here, again, outside of resource areas, closest to the public road. One here near, you know, for this specific structure, which will require concrete. One here right near the road outside of resource areas. One here right along Blood Road, just this very constrained site, as the Commission is aware. but it is on the opposite side of the public road from the wetland resource area, so I thought it would be a decent place to actually stage that concrete washout. Let's see, there's one here pretty much in an upland area to accommodate these structures. And then finally, one in this area closest to Beaverbrook Road, which seemed like a reasonable setup for the contractor.

And Allison, you haven't changed how you're going to handle the washouts in terms of BMPs, correct?

Correct. Yeah. The applicant has specified BMPs for poly with a containment area or one of those poly what do you call them? Outpacks or whatever, the pop-up that are more of like a cardboard material, but they also include the poly for removal and disposal.

I have a couple of conditions that I'd like to suggest we include here. One is I do think we should add time of year restrictions to this, both from a vernal pool perspective as well as from knowing the area. A lot of this gets pretty wet, and I think we could significantly minimize the extent of impacts by doing it in drier seasons rather than wetter seasons. The second condition that I'd like to discuss is conditioning a frequency of inspections. I don't know, Allison, that what I saw in the package, but I also probably didn't read every word of the 200 pages, was that inspections will be done as needed. One of the things we've seen in this area is there's a lot of traffic. Sometimes the sediment and erosion controls can get disturbed. even after the site is sort of coming around to stabilization, I'd like to see the sediment and erosion controls inspected, I don't know, on a monthly basis at a minimum or something like that, post-construction until they're fully removed to make sure that they're intact and functional. Those are the two additional conditions beyond our standard that I'd like.

Understood. I can speak on the frequency of inspection. So this project as a whole, because it does span multiple towns, will trigger a NPDES EPA construction general permit and stormwater pollution prevention plan. As such, BSC, on behalf of the applicant, will be out weekly and within a quarter of a rain event within 24 hours or more. And then we'll we will be preparing reports to the contractors to identify action items for them to address based on the EPA SWPPP requirements. So if it's a maintenance, you know, they have a set amount of time. If it's, you know, it's a noncompliance, you know, it'll definitely be put on a higher priority list. I think we talked at the site walk about providing some kind of reporting to the commission, which the applicant is amenable to document that we are completing these inspections and reporting and following up on action items.

And Allison, this is a lot to inspect on a weekly basis. We understand here that we're talking about comprehensive inspections, right? Not just spot checks.

Absolutely. I would say this would be at least a full-day inspection, you know, once a week as well as, you know, after a rain event. Okay. Project of this size, we're spanning multiple towns. Yeah, definitely a full day.

Yeah, okay. Somebody's going to need their walking shoes.

For potentially six years. Okay. Alison, we had talked quite a bit at the last hearing and then on the site of the various sections of road that are going to be enhanced and different stages of those roads. Did we talk about Blood Road at all? Because it is so fragile at times.

I understand. Yeah, there's no because it's a public road. There's no proposed improvements to that.

I guess I'm concerned because we're using that as an access point. And as Chase alluded to as well, some of the field material is going to come out Blood Road. and go back over to the farm. But I'm just really thinking about some of the heavy equipment that potentially will be on that road. And I mean, we only just drove like five cars through there and it's wet. And as we saw, it has a direct feed right off that road into the wetlands.

Yeah, I understand. I think there's some maintenance that you are going to need to do to maintain the road to minimize the impact to the resource areas. And my expectation is that that's got to be part of your plan and package here. And I actually, I don't know that it is a public road.

So I'm curious, though, We all know the road well, that if we have a rain event and all those trucks still go on that road, we're going to have a lot of impact into the wetlands because we're literally right on it. So I don't know from stormwater of that so much you know just velocity going back and forth with trucks and tires and the wash i just that blood road really concerns me no i understand that makes sense to me as well um

I think based on conversations with Matheson Farm, Blood Road was identified as their primary access for construction. Obviously, the landowner also didn't want heavy equipment traversing on his farm roads regularly. As far as whether this is a public road, it was my understanding that it was. I would have to reach back out to the project team and the applicant to see what kind of coordination would be required with the town to do any sort of upgrades or improvements to that road, and if that would even be something they would consider. I'm just not sure. If it is a public road, I just don't know what the liability would be there. So, I mean, we can definitely agree to additional sediment controls and things of that nature, but I don't think I can speak on improvements that the applicant would make to something that may or may not be a public road right now.

I look at that and I appreciate that we had an opportunity to walk the majority of the site the other day. It for me is, I would say, the holding point for me going forward. I think you've addressed many of our concerns. I think obviously Beaverbrook, that access up there is easier for sure. But as I just want to be clear, I have a lot of concerns on Blood Road. And I'd like to hear what some of the other commissioners have to say about that as well. I recognize that Michael and Kyle aren't here who were on that site walk, but Tim, you certainly know that road well.

I thought that road was private.

I'm almost certain it's private.

Okay.

It is.

I'll have to circle back with the company's real estate team. That's not my expertise.

Andrew just said it's private.

Assistant town clerk.

Okay. I agree with Sarah, Chase.

I just don't know what we could do.

Very fragile. Very fragile road.

I mean, I think... To Carl's point about its fragility, Allison, to the extent that you find out that it is a private road, I think what you're hearing from us is we're concerned about the amount of traffic and the heavy equipment traffic on that. And at least for me, I would expect that the applicant has a plan to maintain or even in some areas upgrade that road where we're crossing streams regularly or were immediately adjacent to resource areas that are otherwise outside of your work, so that the disturbance to the road doesn't result in a disturbance to the resource area. So maybe that's stone in places. Maybe that's supplemental sediment and erosion controls, although they get beat to hell pretty bad on Blood Road. Maybe you've got a better tool in the toolbox, but something to stabilize that is going to be important.

Or even if you had the opportunity at various times to go through, obviously not all the heavy equipment, to go through some of the farm access lanes because they're not in resource areas. I mean, those roads could be rutted up and then graded back out versus Blood Road at times. I think we're going to be washing into the wetlands.

Okay. Yep, I'll hear you.

So, Allison, we meet in two weeks.

So this is a negotiation. I need to reach out to, again, real estate as well as their community engagement group as far as, like, commitments and negotiations that were made with the landowner. But I hear you, and I have my notes here.

Okay. So would you like for us to continue this to the next meeting or two meetings from now?

Next meeting should be fine.

Okay. Sorry, can we circle back to one thing that I proposed? I had suggested to Allison time of year restrictions. Is there any opposition from other members of the commission to asking the applicant to come forward with what they would propose as reasonable time of year restrictions?

No, I would agree.

I just want to make sure you had clear direction from the commission, not just one commissioner shooting his mouth off.

We talked about that on site during that site walk, and there was some hesitation to commit because of the interdepartmental and various towns and all the different kind of layers of contractors that that's, I think we were pretty much told no, but no harm in asking.

I would tell you that this gets a lot harder to permit if you're proposing to do this work in March.

Right.

A lot, lot harder. And I'm not sure that what you've proposed would be adequate in my mind without time of year restrictions.

Okay. All right. So Allison, we're going to go ahead with your permission to continue this to the next meeting in two weeks.

Okay, so that would put us at the 2nd of June.

Tim, is that correct? Yeah, that's correct. Okay.

Okay, great.

Great. Thank you for your help. Thank you. Have a great night. Have a good evening. Okay, we're going to jump back into administrative discussions. Is there anything I neglected to add, if anybody had anything that they wanted to add to that list that we had? I just had one for site walks. Tim, do we have anything coming up? I think one is coming up.

The one that I was going to add actually was, no, we do have a site walk tomorrow at 1230 if anybody can meet with me and Lauren and Scott Smyers from Oxbow out there to look at the Wellens on that site.

Okay, I thought that was postponed. Okay. Anyone able to do that tomorrow? I can't do that one.

No, I can't.

Okay. Okay. Many of us have been out there before.

I think it's probably worth rescheduling just to get commissioners out there as well. Me and Lauren have seen the site, but the site seems to be very different in terms of wetlands than it was when it was permitted back in 2016. I don't know if that's because Scott had mentioned when we were out there there used to be a big runoff issue on Hartwell. And I don't know if that was going onto that site. And now since they fixed it, there's a lesser extent of wetlands there. The isolated, what looks to be an isolated wetland out there right now appears to be very much smaller than it was when it was permitted. And the bordering vegetated wetland towards the back, there might not be a connection there anymore. So I think it's worth commissioners coming out with us as well to take a look because I think the next time those folks come in front of the commission, it could be very different than when it was last put in front of the commission when the original order was issued. So I'll go ahead and reach out to Scott tomorrow or tonight and see if we can find a better date.

That would be potentially maybe next week, the latter part or something. Okay. Okay. Okay. I think that clears the agenda for today.

Sorry, I had one small thing, if it's okay. In a couple weeks, the commission will have in front of them, I'm writing the application now, for Scout Troop 1 to do another sort of camping night, this time probably sort of in the wood line at the top of Long Lake Park. The idea that we would be doing would be like a five mile hike connecting a whole bunch of Littleton conservation lands. A whole bunch of scouts are doing conservation related Eagle projects and sort of the next generation of scouts don't know all of our conservation lands. So the idea would be to do a sort of a five mile hike stringing together a bunch of conservation lands. And then if the commission was willing to allow it, um, probably camp sort of in the tree line, um, adjacent to the meadow at the top of long Lake park. Um, Is that something, understanding you don't have the application in front of you, is that something you all would generally be willing to entertain as long as it was approved by the appropriate entities, or would that be problematic in your mind?

That sounds good, Chase. Do you think you'd have a fire, though, or would it just strictly be camping?

If the fire department was comfortable with it, we would, but if not, then we wouldn't. That was my only question.

Chase, are you planning on having a scout? So will the scouts be planning on trying to connect conservation lands?