Inland Wetlands Commission - Regular Meeting

six o'clock. All right. I'd like to call this regular meeting of the Old Line Wetlands and and Inland Water Hourses Commission to order. Today is Tuesday, July 22nd, and it's 6:00 p.m. We're meeting in the meeting hall at town. We have a packed agenda today. Um, so before the meeting started, we uh decided on a sidewalk date, which was Sorry, which was the date? uh

August 5th and the order of the um new business items for sitewalks. So I'll read those aloud as we discuss the new business. So the first item on the agenda is application 25-20 for 50 Boston Post Road. The applicants are Philip and Susan Beckman. This is for the demolition of an existing detached garage and portion of the existing threebedroom yearround house. the construction of a new attached garage and addition and modify the existing group line. Is anyone here from that application today? Hi, come on up. I don't It's a lot to bring on. Okay. So, hi, my name is Caroline O'hagen. I'm here from Indigo Land Design. I'm representing Phil and Susan Beckman uh for this application. Um, so this property is situated on Boston Post Road. Um, the wetlands are not located on the property. Um, but it is within 100 ft. Um, as you already mentioned, the applicant is proposing to demolish a portion of the existing dwelling. It's a three-bedroom dwelling. Um, and the detached garage, which is shaded in yellow. All that to be removed will be in yellow. Sorry. And um they're proposing to uh construct an attached garage um with living space. Um any and there's going to be some minor fill and grading just just for the back patio and garage. Um any questions I can take to you wanted to do that

before? Any questions? So, is August 5th at 5:45 doable for the sitewalk? Perfect. And will the wetland 100 foot uh mark be marked during the wetlands? Like if if flags are available just to kind of show I believe uh the wetlands were flag survey from 2024 November 2024. So they should still be there. Um and that is one thing for me. wetlands are in green and the 100 foot view area is shaded in pink. So, um but yeah, 5:45 like I said. Wonderful. Thank you so much.

Oh, perfect. All right. So, number two on the agenda is the WEO update for 8 Whooper Wool Road activity within the regulated area.

Yeah. Um when we were out across the street um John noticed that there was activity at 8 ripple weld. So I went out and took some pictures pass around to you folks. Um I did send a letter just saying basically this looks like it is regulated please come in and talk to me about it. I have not heard back. It's not that huge a deal but it is again within 100 ft. Um the shed is closest to the wetlands. I don't know exactly where the shed got there. It doesn't look precisely new. And they cut down about four or five trees. And then um the site has a garage that you go down into. And then they they did this around the garage. So I just pass the photos around take a look at um on my list of horrible, you know, weapons violations. It's not really up there, but again, I did want to sort of come back to you folks and say I have sent a letter to you asking them to come in and I will try and follow up and get get a permit file. There's a copy of the letter. Um, and I will update you further on this. Um, I don't really see myself sort of going to litigation on this sort of thing, but again, it is important to come in for a permit. So, I did want to update the commission because this was something that again, John Mishu specifically, he said, I saw this, please take a look at it. And that's where we are with it. Anybody have any questions about it after you have a chance to look at the thought of it.

Any questions so far? Thank you, Eric. Just put them back in the file when you're done. Yeah.

Just to clarify, pretty much the entire property there is within the 100 foot view area. So you can hardly do almost anything on the site without uh some triggering some sort of review. So again, all of this is theoretically regulated activity and I will follow up with them to make sure they come into Eric, have we regulated this property before? Not to my knowledge. We have no files on it. Um and again, it was 453s. I again I have no zoning record of the shed ever having been put there, but obviously it's a relatively new shed. So that something on the zoning side I'd like to follow up on as well. Um and that's the the shed is closest to the wetlands probably about 10 or 15 feet from the wetlands. Now did you send them certified mail?

I sent them regular regular because this isn't this wasn't a cease to assist order was a show cause thing. It was just you know usually at the first round I just sort of send a letter saying hi I noticed this. Can you please just let me know what's going on with it? Okay. So certified mail tends to be a little more confrontational a little more defensive about it. So, I figure just a again, you know, an inquiry letter saying, "I noticed this. Please, please let me know what's going on." Okay. All right. Thank you.

All right. The third under item under new business is application 25-21 for 129-1 Road. The Open Space Commission is the applicant and they want to reopen the trail and road for public access and add a 25 foot boardwalk over a wet area of the trail to make it passible. Is anyone here from the commission today? I Greg couldn't make it so he asked me to speak. Um, can you introduce yourself for the record? I live in Mile Creek. Thank you.

I'm on the open space committee. The uh um property that we're talking about is the Ames Preserve. It's about 200 acres. Uh it has multiple trails. There's one one trail in particular that we're interested in reopening. It's crucial for a cross town trail. It's the Woods Road. It had been existing for over decades and about five years ago it got flooded with beaver activity. Um there's a picture of what it looked like around the um

but recently uh the lower um beaver dams that were they had blocked the culp and on on to create this flooding they were removed and the flooding just subsided. So the trail is widely almost completely dry except we need to rebuild a bridge where if any of you been in there that's an old culver they've kind of widened out and to make it safe for the public. So about a 15t bridge and then there's a wet area that we would just require a door locked. So I know you see that need to walk through and make a decision on that. I said the importance for us is that it opens up uh a trail from almost the old lime in all the way to McCullik farm. There's a access on by Fifers um across Warper to McCullik and uh we're working on other access across town. It would make a great longdistance trail which is sort of the gold standard for open space with towns with trails back.

So where is the best place to meet you for the site? Um it would be on road. We can open the gate and get some parking in there and we've had support from Rob McCarthy and Fred here and Russ lives next door to that. He probably would have parking there too. So that meeting would be at 6 on the that the sidewalk would be at six o'clock on August 5th. 6 o'clock and August 5th. Was it August 4th or August 5th? August 5th. August 5th. Well, we'll let everyone know.

I'll leave that with you. Thank you, Bill. Did did you I haven't seen all the information that you submitted other than the application form. Have you submitted some sketches about We did have sketches and pictures in there and so forth. I can email copies if we need to. All has it as a exhibit of the record now. Thank you. Thanks a lot. Thank you.

All right. Moving on to item number four for application 25-22 at 16 Townwoods Road for Rodney and Deborah Hornbake for the construction of a 24T x 24T detached accessory building. Does anyone hear from that application? For the record again, Carolina

I'm also here on behalf of Rod and um so we actually visited this property earlier this year. Um see a few familiar faces from that sidewalk. Um we have Milbrook running right through the property. Uh wetlands on either side. Um and the majority of the property is taken up by the 100 foot open review area. Um there was concern um so post approval from you guys last time um they have removed the trees since and the buildings. So all of the yellow shaded buildings have since been removed. Um and there was some concern by both the property owners and the contractor about high groundwater um being so close to the lake in Milbrook. Um so they decided to nyx the basement alto together. There was um living space as well as a bedroom down in the basement. Um so they are proposing to remove this shed that they had previously approved and construct this 24x 24 building in its place um just to replace that that floor area. Um nothing really changes um with the septic system. The only thing is we're um running a line for just a bathroom, no shower, no kitchen, nothing like that. Um, one question you may be asking yourself is, well, why is it not in front of the house out of the island review area? Um, we cannot physically put an accessory building in front of the main house. So, that is why there are any questions, I can assess those now.

Any question? Just some better full disclosure. Joe did ask me if I could handle this as a minor modification. I indicated that a 23x 24 building was kind of too big for a minor modification, which is why you're seeing it again. Um, and again, we're setting it for a sidewalk. Up to you whether you think new sidewalk is is required under the circumstance, Eric. Administratively, do we just modify the existing permit to this new application? Yeah, but it seems like that's Either way you want to do it. I'm happy to I mean, it's going to require an illegal notice attached to the old number if you want attached to the old number. That's what I'm thinking. you'd have one less file. From an electronic standpoint, it's not really going to matter because we're it all goes to the same electronic file anyway.

So whether we give it one number or two numbers, it's all going to the same place. And for the record, it wasn't just Eric. They ran it by me and I said yes, new new permit just because it is a larger building. That was what I was more comfortable with. But I'm I'm open to suggestions of the commission. Yeah. I I just thought administratively and if you had especially when a permit is still viable and it's Michael having a modified existing permit if that's No, I'm just maybe after we see it

from a from a standpoint of paperwork and record keeping I I don't know makes that much difference. um they may get a few dollars back in application fees if we modify because that there's a a lower price for modification existing permit than there is for new permit but other than that not much difference. That was my only administrative question. Would everyone benefit still from going to the site again? I don't see it. Yeah, I wouldn't have to. Okay, we'll save you a sitewalk. We'll only see you once. Great. So, um Thank you.

Thank you so much. All right. Um and then moving on to the last item of new business. It's item 25-23 at 40 Flat Rock Hill Road for Michael and Elizabeth La Mer um for the installation of a gravel access drive on the property with associated utilities for a future home. Is anyone here from Hi. Did I pronounce your last name already? Lamar. Thank you. Sorry about that. you know, we're trying to audio. Thank you. Do you want to just tell us a little bit about your project?

Well, we will be the request tonight is for um the beginning of building a home. So, we're um asking for the uh driveway access and it doesn't um in it it comes within the 100 foot barrier um for um well, I'm not exactly sure along the line. Um but it's within 100 ft of the wetland. Yes. Yeah. Right. Perfect. Okay.

So, um are you available August 5th at 6:15? Yeah. Perfect. So, um a couple of the commission members will just come out to view the site to kind of get an understanding of the lay of the land and what it looks like, right? And then at the wetlands meeting, we'll be able to ask you more pointed questions about the driveway access unless the team believes that it can be administratively done. Um and then we can save you that. that will be discussed at the August 5th uh sitewalk at your property. Okay. All right. That's great. Wonderful. Congratulations.

For the for the sitewalk, if you could have uh just kind of the driveway location marked out, that'd be great. Just a couple flags or stakes for paint or something. So, and I know the wetland flags are still there. Thank you. Thank you. All right, moving on to old business. The first item is application 25-11 for 9 Tanahek Road uh Carrie Meltzer for the application for pond maintenance and restoration and this is an extension request.

Yeah, they have submitted an extension request. We cannot extend it further beyond next month's meeting. However, we do have the ability to extend it at least as far as the August meeting. So, they have submitted a request in the waiting to do so. make a motion or anything. Um, yeah, you should probably make a motion to just because this is an actual extension request that you accept the extension request that the matter will be tabled till the the August meeting. I'll make a motion to approve the extension. Second. Thank you. All those in favor? I any oppose? Any extensions? Great. Passes. Thank you.

All right. Okay. Item number two is application 25-15 for 240 Werwill Road for Alan Christine Bond. The application to replace the existing pavilion.

Uh good evening. I'm Bob Don. um here on behalf of um Al and Christian Bond u regarding their farm at 240 Quick Roof and they would like to replace a um existing um gazebo with a uh 20 by 30 pavilion. Uh it'll be built on peers as is the um gazebo. They want to remove the gazebo and um this is um a farm building related to their uh Christmas tree farm that they'll be uh developing and we feel that the um activity even though it's within 100 ft. This is a a man-made pond, but we had it flagged and located. I've been before you on activity um for the driveway. Excuse me. Uh coming into the um Christmas tree farm for the uh stream crossing. I think um that was handled administratively also.

I I think so. Yes.

Yeah. So that that was also farming activity and so that's it. Um I mean this came in originally if you may recall as an actual application for a wetlands permit. Um they have since now shifted and they're saying that they should be exempt as farming activity. Um the question for the commission to consider is whether the gazebo is integral to the farmer operation. Um and again you have you know Bob's presentation regarding where it is and what it's there for. So if you believe it is exempted from wetlands activity for wetlands permit requirements you just need to make a determination of no jurisdiction and a motion to that effect.

What is the definition of farming activity and well for the record? for the record.

Um, okay. So, farming um just as shall be consistent with the definition as noted in the section 11Q of the central general statutes which is very very broad. Um the sorts of activities that they're actually doing on site would be considered farming. The question then again it comes to um whether the gazebo is let me agree to the section out of your regs 41A um the provision of subdivision shall not include um the erection of buildings not directly related to the farming operation. So again the question is is this directly related to the farming operation? Um, so that's that's the the question. I highlighted that section of the regs for you because that's really what we're looking at this evening as far as the review and and the determination.

So, Mr. Jones, how would this be related to the farming operation of the of the It's to accommodate those that uh come to um visit the Christmas tree farm and view it. And um they may have um they'll be able to meet and do their transaction to buy the tree in the pavilion.

Do we have a picture of what the it looks like? Is it opensided? Is it It's open opensided. It's just a roof on on It's very similar to the gazebo.

Okay. uh gazebo being I think it's hexagonal um is not efficient as far as the shape goes. So we'd rather have a rectangular one and the gazebo is in need of repair instead of repairing it. We'll just remove it and build a pavilion that's open on all four sides. Um and it will serve as a shelter and area to um purchase the Christmas trees. Have they been using the existing one for that purpose? I'm not sure. Um it's it's there for it. Uh the Christmas tree uh farm is in its early stages of of developing. It's not functioning.

Okay. Um yet, so it's it's the goal to have the um Christmas tree farm up and running. And this will this might help the commission's consideration. 11Q is a very long definition. Yeah, it is

um that defines um agriculture and farming under the general statutes, but there's a there's a provision the term farm includes farm buildings and accessory buildings there too. Um you know nurseries, orchards, ranges, green houses, hoop houses and other structures and structure structures used primarily and as an incident to ordinary farming operations. the sale of agricultural or horicultural commodities. So it does include buildings used for sale which I think this kind of seems like it falls into. I would make a motion to no jurisdiction that cuz I think it pretty much was word for word what that definition is.

Second that. Those in favor I any oppose? Any abstensions? As Thank you so much. But for what it's worth, we are still doing the silk fence, you know, and everything like that. So, we figured you're always on top of that. Thank you very much. Thank you. Never applied that part of the statute before. So, that was interesting. Look at that. There's a first for everything. All right. Uh, moving on to item number three under old business. That's application 25-16 for 234 Wer Road for Timothy Secla. uh the application to replace the existing outbuilding shed with a larger structure approximately 16 by 36 ft.

Good evening. Good evening. Let me say a lot of uh lot of work going on in Whipper Road, it seems. Yes.

Um so uh fairly crude. I can pass this out if anyone would like but um my interest is in uh demoing my existing out building, my existing shed to replace with a larger one. My current one is about uh 12 by 12. looking to replace with something of more practical use size which is 16 by 36. It's approximately 75 feet or so from the listed wetlands. Um I also I have a number of drawings about the the actual construction. Um that's what I'm looking to do. It's a uh it's going to be a monolithic pore with about a 4 inch uh foundation.

Any questions from this application? None. Does anyone want to make a motion? It's a real flat lot with no real I don't really see any risk for erosion. So, I'd make a motion to approve as submitted. Second. Second. Okay. All those in favor. Uh, any abstensions or objections? Seeing none, it passes. Good luck with your project. Appreciate. Thank you. Thank you for coming in.

Great. Item number four under old business is for 25 or application 25-17 64 Grassy Hill Road. Um this is Fetis engineering. An application for proposed 12x 45 ft first floor edition, a 370 ft second story edition, plus a 398 foot loft and a new septic system. Is anyone here from this application? Um

I don't see anyone here from Fetish Engineering, but many North will be there and the Mr. River Building Company and we will be u we plan to build the project assuming that it's approved. Um Greg submitted an application for the uh uh for the new plan which basically has a 12oot addition on the water side of the house uh just on the first floor only. Uh the family lives in Glastonbury. This has been like a summer home for them. Uh they're at some point going to be retiring in the next few years. They have three sons that are all in their 20s that are getting married and going to have children and so forth. So they need to add another bedroom. So we're adding another bedroom on the second floor and a bonus room over the garage which would be used as like a playroom, uh you know, pool room, that sort of thing. Um so it is uh we are getting a little closer to the lake. Uh but beyond that um I don't think that there's any negative impact. Uh we are replacing the septic system entirely. Um uh and so that would obviously be upgraded to um um to handle the four bedrooms.

I didn't see the septic system on the application. Do you know where that was going in relation to the house? I believe it's on the notes in your agenda. Well, it's in the notes on the agenda, but seeing it on the plan what Tom is referring to. Oh, I didn't see that at the sidewalk. Okay.

Currently, currently the septic tank is in very close proximity to the back of the house and so where the new addition is going to be would basically be on top of the tank. And so we're uh changing the flow out of the house going to the sideyard directly and then replacing the system entirely. Tank and bleaching. I didn't see that ship there. So new information. Thank you. Does anybody want another copy or is that sufficient?

Thank you.

Were there any questions from the sitewalk that anyone has where the subject system was one of the questions? There wasn't anybody there to really talk to when we were there. Got it. Okay. Any questions? Seems pretty straightforward. Okay. Um I will make a motion to approve of this application with this additional sheet that was provided to us regarding the location of the septic. I'll second that. Thank you. Um all those in favor

just okay to say that you know it would have right standard sedimentation erosion controls to protect those standard condition I will go out there and inspect when they get started and make sure you control place on there. Yeah that's that's the only condition I think we need. Pretty good about keeping me going back out and reinspecting this stuff. So it's been it's been good with that provision. You're yours. I'm comfortable. So we can vote. Perfect. Okay. So I'll just do that again just for clarity. So I made the motion with the regular conditions. Um and then sorry who seconded. Okay. Perfect. Thank you. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? Any abstensions? Seeing none passes.

Thank you very much. Thank you. Congratulations. All right. Um, item number five under old business is 16 Neck Road and to Sharon Drive for a discussion of the status of the violation and appropriate next steps.

Um, at the invitation of the property owner, um, I was out there yesterday. Um, there were two representative Jake Jacobson's office and Richard Snarski who was the applicant engineer so scientist rather. Um, we did go to see what progress has been made on the site. The only real significant difference from the last time you folks have seen it um is this point there's now grass growing to help stabilize the soils. The other issues, the other items that were raised in your order, the other items that were raised in the U May 25th uh sitewalk notes from Jacobson have not been addressed. Um, at this point, Snarski did go into the wetlands and with his augur took measurements of how deep the silt is in the wetlands at this point in time. Closest to where you guys saw it going in, the uh silt is 4 in deep. Um, it then sort of tapers off as it gets several hundred feet in so that by the time it you get reach the other end of the wetlands, there is silt, but it is relatively small amount. Um again at this point in time um we don't have any of the things that were required. Again the applicant was supposed to come in with a bond and all rest of that. We have not seen any of that new plans the uh asbuilts for the foundation. So um I have invited the applicant here to speak on this matter and again we have the attorney here to your attorney here to discuss what are our next best steps. So

good evening. So, as uh as he mentioned, we had the engineers there. I had a come out just to take another look because since you've seen it last, we've re regraded everything on both sides of the road and re and planted um seeds and it's we actually had to cut it today with the long rolling. Um I brought some pictures so you can take a look. Um the engineer made some recommendations on that temporary covert that we have to direct the water. Um he wanted additional check dams with silk fence and hay bales. Uh today we added seven of them and I've got pictures here. Um right now there unless we have some major major storms um we don't see any any kind of silk getting any any any worse for the for the wet lakes and as he mentioned Richard Snark Snarski

Snarski

was there and um one of the recommendations that Eric had made last time was the 20 foot buffer and I went over it with Richard and he said it's not necessary. right now from the silk fence we have 40 ft at the closest point and over 120 ft at the closest point. Um so the 20ft buffer uh is not needed. However, Eric and I will work out something to put on the deed for that particular lot um so that we can prevent whoever buys that property that home to do any any work within that 20 foot buffer.

Yeah. I asked that the area on site be flagged in some permanent way so that people know not to cut that vegetation down and that the deed be noted that that area is conservation buffer as required by the wetlands commission. Um if saying we don't need to rip it out and replant it. I'll trust Richard Sarski's position on that. But I do want to make sure that the vegetated buffer 20 ft does remain um even after the property is sold so that there is no further interference with the wetlands that are just towards the connect road side of that property.

So I have some pictures here if you'd like to take a look of what it looks like now. Everything's green including the big mountain of dirt is uh all grown in. So, but right now, Richard Snarsky is preparing this a drawing for me, uh, telling me where we need to go in and dig out by hand the uh, the wetland section, which is a lot smaller than what we all thought. Uh, he says where it's 4 in or or less, it's already growing in. So, he hasn't had a problem with that, but he's he's going to provide me a drawing to do whatever we got to do. And as you can see, we have been keeping up on it. Um, it's been it's been a tough job since we started it and we started doing the work. We messed up on the uh on the road by using somebody that said that he knew everything about doing roads and all the publicity got us in trouble with the bank. So, we lost our financing. We've been trying to we're in the process of refinancing again right now. Um and we're very close uh probably within the next two weeks. We should be starting back up again in full full force. Um, and I know that regarding the bond, uh, that if it's not paid, there's going to be leans and what have you, that would just put a a damper on the project and basically put us out of business. Um,

again, as the commission will recall, they had the opportunity to come in for asking out if they could demonstrate some progress for beating any of your conditions by last month's meeting and they did not do that. They did not show up. So, that's why the bond went from 50 to 100. So up to you folks how you want to handle this but again there of the issues raised by your order and of the issues that has been raised by uh Jameson's office on their site visits we have not seen much in the way of progress. Um and again at this point there the silk fencing around the entrance to the wetlands has not been refreshed. The hay bales that they put to block the catch basins are the same hay bales were there originally and there's now large amounts of mud that has accumulated against those hay bales. Um this uh catch basins themselves have not been cleaned out. Um I have pictures on my phone of the the uh retention basin. It is now largely filled in with mud and is going to need to be cleaned out. Um there is just a lot of work that is required to get this site back into feasible condition. Um and if it's not done properly, we need a bond to call to make it happen. So I would encourage you not to let the bombs get go away to to a large degree because we again should this not happen properly, we will be needing monies to go and restore the site. And um you know I don't sort of leave it at that. I said my piece on.

Well, I mean everything that you just mentioned is all work in progress. I mean the job is as far as the catch basins, we know we have to clean them out in order to get satisfaction with the engineer. We know we have to dig out the pond. This is not a road right now that's open to the public. It's never will be. It's a private road. So, and I know we have to build it to standards, but we're working right now on the job. It's not like we we're done and we're saying okay we're done give us our but okay but by then it'll be too late to get a bond. The point is we get a bond now so that when you are done if it's not done properly we can restore the property.

So so thank you both for that. So my I have two questions to you. Where were you at the last meeting and why haven't the catch basins been cleaned in the interim?

There's no need to catch to clean them now. We still have the another 800 feet of road to build. So why am I cleaning catch basins now? I still have to do another layer of black top. I have to clean the catch basins. I have to actually fulfill the inspections that the engineer wants, which is digging out the pipe and refilling them with proper gravel. So I have a lot of work to do yet. So cleaning catch basins, digging out the pond. Right now, my my goal is to keep the runoff from going into the wetlands, which as you can see by the pictures, nothing's going to get down that go anymore. You did that today, right? I did that this morning.

Okay. So, you had two months and you did it. I had the meeting yesterday. I had the meeting yesterday with the engineers and they gave me these recommendations and I I did what they wanted and I h I hired Snarsy to come in and make an evaluation. Now he's drawing up a set of plans for me. So until I have that, I don't have the direction as far as what to do. You realize you just understand it doesn't look right that you wait till the morning of the meeting to do anything really. Well, again, we had the meeting yesterday and I I

you missed the last meeting. I you you just understand that it doesn't doesn't show a lot of effort to try to make to ease our concerns when you kind of do it like it's it's like cleaning your room when your parents are like driving in the driveway after vacation. It's like any other comments, questions. So the bond could be 50,000. Well,

50%. We you originally when this was first in front of you said that you would agree to accept half the bond if they showed progress within 30 days. Um and in the absence of progress you then last meeting said you wanted the full hund. Again, half of this bond is for road purposes. And again, if you feel that you just want the half that's more or less tied to the weapons purposes, I understand that. Um, you should again evaluate the track record here and whether you're confident that this is going to get done properly. So again, if you want to go with F, that is a commission decision. Um, I I have concerns, but ultimately I will take whatever the commission you wants to give me for a bond. No, we're we're not fly by nights. We we've had issues with the project. Like I said, we just built a $10 million project on Lord's Metal Lane and finished it. Sold all the houses there and now we're going to be doing another 1012 million on this one in Old Line. So, I don't know what else. You know, we're not running away. We have a lot of money invested in this and um it's it's a hardship right now.

Um looking at the photos, I'm happy that there's some green finally on the site, having never seen green before. Um, and I I have to go really with what Eric is telling us because he was there. Um, this might be a a site to look at again as a commission before we do anything radical. I think um I would just like to see the site again. And since it's August 5th and this is what the 22nd the permit he has a lot of time to clean the you know address some of the issues that the staff has raised even though it is the last minute today I I tend to try and work with the applicant short of work. So I'm happy to see some green. I just don't have a feel for how much green there is on this whole site. Eric has a better feeling for it and his report doesn't give me a lot of confidence unfortunately.

I guess I concur with what you're saying and it what you're getting at before is good faith, right? There hasn't been a lot of good faith on this. There hasn't been a lot of money as well. No, showing up doesn't cost you any money. That was a mistake. It's happened twice. You weren't at the last meeting either, I don't think. No, I was here. Yeah. So, it just doesn't seem like there's been a lot of Well, I think you can understand our perspective on that. I missed the one meeting, but the missed show last year. Yeah. Correct. And the site meeting. Correct. So, so it's not one time, it's multiple times. And so, I guess I I agree. Misunderstanding on my part. So,

okay. I I apologize. But I I I guess to Mike's point though, we've got an open slot at that on that um fifth. Yes. Because one is not being used. Can we use that to go by there? Well, I mean that would only be 15 minutes to beginning. I would suggest that maybe you want to do 6:30 and that way you've got as long as we take to do it. Doing it 15 minutes probably doesn't do it just time. Yeah, I that's fine. At the end I would recommend. So let's say aim for 6:30 on August 5th then is that

and you've got time to do stuff. I mean, you've talked to the engineer. Maybe Rick will have some plan or something and you can do the stuff that's relatively easy to do. Can I talk about this a little bit? So, because the last time we had the meeting, I didn't have any permission to talk from from that. So, since that meeting, there was no grass there at that time. And I think you guys have seen the progression from then till now. and I went back and expressed my concerns and what direction they're headed, which wasn't a great direction. So, we took charge of that site and redirected the water to stabilize the the surface

um and then got the town's involvement as he said today and and defend and understand what you guys are coming from. When he got the word today, we did the work today. So when he got per you know basically when they said today we went today. So we are we're proactive based on the information provided and I do get your point of not showing up in the past and that's where I felt like I needed to discuss with you. You know what we're doing up there. I mean we've turned that water around from yeah the last meeting to current. We turn it around. There's there's there's nothing going in the wetlands at this point. Everything's has to go through some type of grass and lawn and it's backgraded and it's going into those into the, you know, temporary swailes uh until the upgrade gets established and the houses get financed and finished and start getting the landscaping in them and finishing. You got to finish around each one of those houses. But I think we've got it got a good solid hold on it. There's going to be no blowouts from here moving forward. Um, but I I encourage you to go look at it. I I think you I think if you went up there, uh, Tommy, I think if you went up there and you looked around, you'd feel

that's the plan to go on at 6:30. So, you feel pretty comfortable about what you saw from 30 days ago to current. We're we're only a month, you know, uh, we grabbed that grass by, you know, seconds, but it's it's dug in and it's it's happy and you're going to mow it, maintain it. So, you Yeah, we mowed some today. Yeah. So, it want to stay there. It's in the shade, so it it should dig in pretty good and and uh give uh good protection to the wetlands. Is there a clear list as to what needs to be done?

There are several lists. There is the actual order that was issued by this commission at the after the shelf hearing. There is a list of issues that was presented by Jacobson after their May 25th sitewalk. there was an earlier list prepared by Jacobson after an earlier sitewalk. Um, all of those are obviously available to the applicant and I can make them available again to the commission so they can get a list before the sitewalk of what should be Are you guys clear on what needs to be done? I every bit of information I got we installed today. So that's I don't think there's anything in writing. That's that's the only way.

Well, there there there is a list and Greg um Eric mentioned some of them like cleaning the catch basins. We're we're still working on them. It's like I got dirt in the catch base and I know I got to clean I I understand that but it has been two months, you know, and but then I'm not finished with the job. So, I understand that. But

the goal should be no new material going into those catch basins. And therefore, if you clean them out and you clean out your pond and you prevent new material from going in, you won't have to clean them out again. The goal is silt sacks that you clean out regularly or replace regularly, which you weren't doing before. The goal is to make sure that you are preventing new material from going in so that it's a clean system. Right now, the whole system is filled with dirt and that's a problem and it should be resolved. Again, that's why we're asking for the erosion control. Okay.

And I I just to that point, just the the lack of work in the last two months and the the lack of effort that we've seen, I'm not convinced to lower the bond at this point. You yourself have said you've had trouble with this project in the past. Now you're needing refinancing. I'm feeling like what if we're left in the lurch to remediate this property on behalf of the taxpayers of the town of Old Lime. It's great that you put in a development in Lord's Meadow and it was a valuable investment for you, I would hope, and for the town

and for the town. But, you know, there's there's been issues in both projects and the taxpayers of old lives shouldn't be left carrying the bill at the end of the day to remediate this property. If all of a sudden you lose your financing because of another precedent and and now we have to clean up the entire project for something that you haven't been maintaining. So, I I would not be in favor of lowering the onus. I have one other question and point to make. Um I understand there's discussion regarding a buffer of 20 feet. My recommendation would be to have that depicted on a map and have a conservation easement drawn up.

Then it's I'm not sure if that's already been discussed, but uh it's it's a fairly straightforward process. That's fine. Um but that that would formalize it and then it would be in the the deed. That's for one of the lots that we regulated. That's the one you guys wanted the asbuilt or at least the foundation location shown. And again, between that and the wetlands, a formalized 20 foot buffer that would be essentially permanent and prevent anything between the house and the wetlands. Yeah, I'm a big require placards and

I'm a big fan of delineating that buffer with like a stone wall or a rail. I'll let the applicant pick how he wants to delineate it, but ultimately it's got to be delineated and it has to be noted in the site on the field rather in in the deed both so that it's clear that it's a permanent restriction on developing on that part and it's a condition of our permit. Yes. So, do we need to move on anything regarding the bond to set the sitewalk? I mean, table it till next morning. And just indicate that this will be taken up the sidewalk on August 5th, 6:30. Okay. I'll make a motion to table this. Second.

All those in favor? I. Any objections? Any abstensions? Seeing none. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks, Eric. Do you want these pictures or Yeah. Yeah. They're part of the the record there. So, we'll make a new exhibit. Um, the next item under old business is item number seven or sorry, item number six for the fee schedule proposal for the inland wetlands and water forces. If there are people here for seven, we could Yeah, because that's an administrative thing, we could do seven, it'll Okay. I mean, if there's people here rather than let them wait because if the recording were to glitch out, I don't want to lose the entire thing. Got it.

For that one. So, I would I mean, you can move it, but there's the recording. We're worried that because we're recording on Teams here or putting things on the screen, it might interrupt the team's recording in some way, shape, or form. Okay. So, we're just trying to make sure that if we lose the team's recording, we only lose the last piece of the meeting, not anything without it. So, perfect. Yeah. Okay. So, we'll leave it as it is. Um, any updates on You guys asked for a look to take a look at Yeah, that was that was me and I I I have taken a look at the the fee schedule. I have some recommendations.

Um, but I have a question first with the fee schedule. um as it relates to a single family residence, someone comes in and they're going to build a house and the fee um I think is $100 now and it's proposed to go to 150. Now, are these cumulative? So if that one house has a crossing of a wetland, do we then add a $200 fee for that first crossing? So it would be 150 plus the 200

theoretically. Yes. It's cumulative because obviously the impact of the work would be cumulative. That's all I and and when I don't understand how the applicant I mean if I was the applicant I would be very confused when I looked at our application because the fees are kind of in there and there's a lot of them and I wouldn't I would assume they sit and talk to someone they will always talk to me or Fallon about these fees. Got But if we want to try and clarify them to make clearer that these fees are cumulative, you know, I think people understand that, we can certainly spell that out in greater detail so people understand that

and that would apply to um the subdivisions and commercial as as well. They're additive. Okay. I think it would be important to to explain that again. The $60 deep fee is also additional fee. We need to explain how we add up these fees to get to the final number,

right? Um I was for for jokes. I was going to go over what the Greenwich Inland wetlands and water courses agency charges, but I won't. If you're interested, you can look online. And when I was there 25 years ago, we we generated around300 to $400,000 of income a year, but they're very busy. But but a house might be $2,000 or $4,000. I they the fees have gone crazy since I left. But okay, getting back to the fee schedules, I would recommend um on the residential lot is we sort of have this matrix. Pools, sheds, um decks, we recommend it going from 75 to from 75 to 125. I'd recommend 150 because um we visit the site, at least the staff visits the site with usually for a site visit unless it's really really simple. And then Eric has to go back at the end. And I would think, you know, $75 a visit isn't a lot today. So I I would recommend that we would increase that. The same with a house. Um because it's additive though. Okay. If you're building a house and there's a crossing, I would recommend a house feed be I mean a house is a substantial structure. Hundreds of thousands of dollars probably if not a million. 250 doesn't seem to be out of bounds because again we're visiting the site and if you take I mean just the house site to Sharon Lane I mean unless we had some sort of compliance fee when we start to have trouble with a

particular permitted site where we could charge a $75 fee per compliance visit. It wouldn't affect 90% of our folks, but the folks that we have difficulty with, I think would help cover our staff cost. Um, and if we did have a compliance fee, I would suggest $75 a visit. Um, on the subdivisions, although I haven't seen a subdivision, I don't think. Um, a lot of times the fee is related to the number of lots in a subdivision. We don't have that. We did the subdivision on uh Button Ball. Button ball.

I remember down by the golf course. Button on the corner there. Where was I? I don't I don't remember visiting that site. You were there. You were in there. I think your wife was there, too. Actually, I visited once a month to make sure the silk fencing gets replaced. So, okay. I mean,

but I I thought a per lot fee would be interesting. And um I mean taking this is this is sort of a subdiv it started as a subdivision. It looks like we issued a permit for the roadway Sharon Lane. And look at the mess we have here. So there ought to be something that helps us collect compliance fees when we have trouble on a site. I don't know how to do that. The way we have done subdivisions in the past is we approve the subdivision as one application but then we make them come back for individual wetlands permits for each lot that involves wetlands activity.

So for instance if you look on the agenda tonight 16 neck is the subdivision approval while two Sharon is the lock approval and they're two separate approvals. So I think you need to sort of factor in that already for this application we collected one fee for the subdivision and one fee for the lot. So that we're already sort of collecting twice for that. And I admit it doesn't cover our costs. But just keep in mind that on those sorts of situations, we already have two rounds of application fees coming in.

One thing you could do is if if it's a subdivision of up to five lots, it's a fee. If it's a subdivision of X lots, it's a larger fee because I think that's where you would run into, you know, more extensive work if it's a 30 lot subdivision versus a three lot subdivision. So, I don't know if that makes sense, but well, it was a it was a thought and I I didn't I mean, we there's nothing that says we can't modify this in the future. These are just some thoughts that I had um on the commercial industrial um the activity fee for review um of commercial activities. It's it's cumulative. So there's a 250 fee. Now, I would double it to 500 um just because I tend to think those sites are going to be more complex and require more visits and then you know if they're well and then you'd have the supplemental fee which would collect but I would still have some sort of comp generalized compliance fee that would apply to you know not only single family residences but subdivisions and and commercial it wouldn't be a lot. Then the only the only other thing I I noticed um and I like the new application form um and it's changed a little bit compared to our existing one because the existing one was confusing to me the first time I saw it because it sort of starts out and then our fee structure is there. I would recommend we pull the fee structure and just have the fees separate and attached, especially since the applicant isn't going to be um figuring them out. Staff is going to be doing it. So, it's not as critical that it be there. And so, what sort of happens then is we almost have

with the new format um a mini checklist. Okay, which is really I think important for the applicant to know what type of information we need to add and it it it seems to comply with section seven of our our regs that talks about what you put in an application. Um the only thing I would add to application requirements um at this stage is we need to site that we need a completed D reporting form. It's required by our regulations. we sometimes get it and sometimes we don't. Um, that goes with the $60 fee that we charge. So, we should get the form. We know whether or not we send the form to D and they do anything with it. I wouldn't ask that question. Um, the only other thing on the site plan or GIS map that we request kind of in the in the checklist, the new the new application check, what I'm calling the application checklist is that when they provided us with the town's GIS map and it's easy to print, use the wetland layer.

Sure. So would you be open to redlinining or like making I'll come into the office and then that distributed to the commission before the next meeting so we can all kind of see it because I know some people can hear something and understand it. Other people are more visual. Um so I think I don't think anything is really radical except maybe the compliance fee on troublesome sites. Yeah. And I I think that's fair. I think we should cover the the costs that the town is incurring on behalf of these private property owners um that are looking to get work done. So, but I'll put that together and get it to Eric. Yeah. How much is the reporting like the advertising?

How much are we spending on advertising with most of these applications? Um because we're not doing public hearings and it's usually just a legal notice of decision. Um I would say I fell in audience better than I did. Most of these are $300 or so dollars for legal notice, but again, it's for all of your decisions at once. Okay. It depends on the length of them. Sometimes they're like 150, but there's five approvals. It'll be like up to $300. Okay. Do we want to try to catch that in there? Yeah. I mean, I mean, I realize it's going to be kind of an average of

it's going to be sort of again an average. Um, and again, some of that's sort of in what you're looking at here. That's why the fees are going up because the legal notice numbers are going up. Um, again, were we to be doing legal notices for public hearings, which we don't do often. Um, I think we want to catch that one in there. But if it's legal as a decision, it's probably only at this point $50, $60 per application at this point, which is not a huge number. I think we're trying to capture that as part of our numbers. I mean, I I would be in favor of even going just a little bit over because I know we're not going to update this every year as the the print the cost.

Yeah, exactly. So, maybe just capture that, you know, for a five 10 year period. Have these fees been in the those fees have been enforced for se many years. Many years. Okay. So, I don't feel bad about doubling. Probably when I was born. Sorry. Well, I recognize that we're not going to generate huge amounts of dollars, but when Eric goes to defend our budget, it would be nice to say, you know, instead if we earn $8,000 instead of four,

right? I I agree. And I think, you know, just for the taxpayers of old line to see that we're actually covering our costs with what we're taking in and we're not going into a deficit for anything. And then when we have to have our lovely attorney here to help us out, we're we're covered in that. Yeah. back double speeds. Okay. Okay. So, that seems like um good action items for the the next month. Thank you, Michael. Thank you. Any other discussion before I move on? All right, moving on to um item number seven, which is 308-1 Mile Creek Road for a violation status update.

Did we want to accept? Yeah, we did receive a new application today from Ron that we can accept into the the record at this meeting. Do you want to do this? Um, so I'll make a motion to add um a new application for 308-1 Wild Creek Road to the agenda um which has been given to you. I I brought you extras. All those in favor? I don't know if everybody is paying attention. Uh you guys, I made a motion to accept this application. No, it's okay. To accept the application into the record uh for today so we can discuss it. Uh is everyone in favor of that?

Okay. Seeing everyone. Yes. Oh, thank you. I was just going to share with Tom. Well, yeah. You have one. Uh someone down the Someone down the table has the original. So, just look for a wet ink signature on yours and don't take it. I'm going to start small. Start small. Who has the black clip? Black clipped the end there. Original. You have the black clip. All the way at the end there. Oh, that's silver. That's So that's the original.

So we'll swap out. I'll pass my signature out. Todd's used a black original black clip.

So, so, uh, Ron Swainy for the record. Um, um, bringing this application in. I think the last time you guys were on site, you probably noticed on the left hand side the elevation of the water in that left pond. Um, and you'll you'll see in the photos um where the uh beaver plugged the pipe, the pipes weren't uh in the best of condition to start with. Um but if you go into number six and you'll you'll see where uh the beavers plugged the pipe and then um the water had come around the outside of the pipe carving a trench um over 4 feet almost 5t wide um dumping the water from actually all three ponds. It's roughly about two and a half to three feet of water in total. As the time goes on, it's the trench is going to get deeper and you know there is some ledge there. So fortunately the ledge is holding it back. The water the balance of the water that was in there. Um if you continue you'll see these are photos were taken in May um May 31st. If you if you go to the um you'll see 4:15 today. That photo, it's number seven uh of the nine photos. Um that beaver has created a twoft tall burm and he's working on it daily. Uh, I'm not taking it out only because it's allowing the water to stay in the pond and actually, you know, it's probably better than than worse at this point uh for the turtles and and uh we do see less turtle activity. I think it's because of the temperature of the water uh because it was so low. A lot of uh animals aren't in there currently this year. It doesn't

seem like that have been in the past um because of the elevation. Um what I'm what I'm proposing um is to um upgrade uh the two pipes something more uh permanent. Um the pipes that are uh currently there uh I did a design flow on those and then I did a redesign flow on uh the pipes that I'm proposing. uh they're 29% larger volumewise, but they'll still maintain the elevation of the water in the ponds, maintaining it. Uh in addition to that, with the head wall, there would be two sliding grates that would go down in front of those pipes so that when I go out on the head wall, I could actually pull that grade up, clear the debris, and then drop the grate back down. Uh much safer, cleaner, seasonal. Uh, I don't think we're going to beat the beavers. I I you know, I just don't. As we hear around town and everything, you know, we trap them yearly. We've been doing it for uh 10 years. Um, we haven't got them out of there yet, and that's that would be a great idea, but I don't think it's happening anytime soon. So I think by building this head wall uh the two pipes and then uh as an overflow uh let that water if it was to exceed those two pipes it would go through um a pretty typical rip wrap um run you know outlet over the top of them um and allow any excess water to go over. The whole purpose of this um is just to maintain the water that's in those ponds. I mean, there's no other value there. Um it's rainwater. It's it's, you

know, it's where that's where the turtles and and the birds live. So, um unfortunately, it got compromised and and uh it needs to be either gets restored or we let the beaver do his thing. And uh I I have a feeling that a good fall storm or spring storm will take that Beaver's Dam out and we'll be back down to zero. So I just feel like this is a uh a good fix. Uh fairly inexpensive. Uh my cost is roughly about 12,000. Uh I feel it'll take about one day. Uh the head wall would be built off site. Uh there the trench is wider than the head wall. Uh if you look uh at the trench previously, it was substantially smaller, but now that the water's washing down through there, it's opening it up wider and wider. So ultimately I'd like to reset the head wall, put the soil back to where it was, and then um any water additionally from that would go over top of that head wall and stay in the in the trench as uh it had been in the past. Yeah. And you could you can see that opening um in those photos of uh how wide that trench is was and then how wide it is now. Those pipes are only about 8 ft apart currently or not even probably not even that far apart currently. Um, if you look at uh page four or nine, you can see where it washed out uh along the side and it's taking the gra the sand and gravel and washing it into that pond in the back. That's um that would be current conditions, but the Beaieber Dam is uh

stockpiling the water in the pond right now. So, as long as that beaver dam stays in there, um, and it's not a beaver house, it's just a beaver dam. That's not where they're living. Uh, they're actually living farther back in the pond. So, they're trying to get the water up so that they have their protection. Um, but if we can if you know that once that water they get to the top of their water, it's just trickling right now, but we're off season. we get any significant rain, it could probably take that beaver dam out and it's just going to continue to wash that silt into that uh into that pond as you can see in page uh 49. Um Mr. Sweeney did provide this electronically to me at 8:30 this morning. Um with his consent, I forwarded to Jacobson's office to get a fee estimate from Jacobson that Mr. Sweeney has agreed to cover for review of this application. um given the nature of both the site and the sort of activity proposed and the fact that it's literally in the water course, it seemed like something that an engineer should be reviewing for your agency. So, um again, I did send that out 8:30 this morning to I have Aaron Mortonson. I have not heard back, not shockingly, but um when that when that does come back, I will forward that on to Mr. Sweeney and we will have that reviewed in time for your next meeting.

Could we locate I mean I'm confused as to where this is. cuz I know where the three ponds are, but could we locate it on big map? Absolutely. So, it is on here. I provided this uh at every one of I don't know necessarily where that is. Sure. Let me help you. We can make sure that you have you could we field locate this on a survey that you already have or you guys understand where this is. But just for just for us conversation wise, right, this is the current cover pipe. Okay. Right. And then it's right to the left of that. So as you come over that cover pipe, it's right there to the left. You a little bit here when you go over the existing cover.

There was sort of this area where you could walk further to your left here. Yep. If you walked down that area to your right is where this is and that's where it's been washed out and that's where he's proposing to put in this water. So those three ponds kind of those three ponds go down towards where that area is. Downstream pond. Yeah. This this is downstream from those three ponds. And again if you walk out I've seen you walk out that that portion there to the left and again to your right as you walk through there and we'll get you a map that shows this. Remember you pulled me back. I did because you were not staying with the group. So um that's why I remember where you were. Um but anyway, so now you can wander.

Now you can go a bit. I gave you permission now. I want you to wander.

Um so that is that application. And then the other piece of this um and again if you want to set that for site walk or whatever you want to do that's up to you folks. Um but that's that is the new application. Um on the agenda is the existing matter um from your previous order. Um I was out there yesterday morning at Mr. Swain's request. U my understanding is I asked him should I take some pictures since this is theoretically my report? He said no. He would be bringing pictures. Does he have pictures? Um this this was not done when I was there yesterday. This was done apparently this morning. This morning.

Yeah. So this is the the scraping of it. So what that first picture showing is the reclaimed um removed. So that's the existing sandy gravel drive by that millings. Millings. Yep. Okay. And then that's the inch and a quarter. Uh it's like rounds. It's not really trap rock. It's more rounds. I figured it'll it'll get less traction. Maybe the water will go through it better. But that's the 2 in of the uh inch and a quarter. It basically stops at probably 10 ft from the pipe because that's where the reclaim ended. Uh and it's side to side and it covers the whole road uh from the gate all the way in.

Sorry to change the subject. Did we want to set a sitewalk for the for the pipe stuff? So we didn't do that. It wasn't I don't know. You haven't done it yet. So did we want to set a sidewalk? Want to? Yeah. before we just before I forget and we Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Um I don't we can either do it after Sharon or we can try to fit it before Boston. I don't know if we can see everything in 15 minutes or not. Well, this particular application is for the narrow very narrow issue of the covert. So the covert you can probably see in 15 minutes and it's just in one specific location.

So we want to switch that one back. We want to fill that 531. put put that back in this 5:30 on the 5th. Sure. To look at that cover. Yeah. And we'll potentially have some engineering by next. Yeah. I'm hoping you will have an engineering report by the next meeting if we're all adequate in size or design or

we'll have to wait and see what it says. But yeah, I mean the goal is to see that it works as designed and will do what Mr. Train says it will do and will not cause undue damage to the wetlands or whatever else. So I yeah I sent it to Mr. Mortonson this morning at 8:30. Um as soon as I hear back from him I will make sure we have something in time for next meeting. Okay. Thanks. Sorry Eric. If he has any questions on the existing pipes that are there I'll have to talk to you. Again first issue is let's get a fee estimate from him. Second is I will have him talk to you as frequently as he needs to and get out there if he needs to just to see what's going on. Great. Thank you.

Um so this is is that that's the finished product as far as the driveway goes. I broke them up into the three locations that we talked about the driveway that the um the removal of the burm. So I think the next is the burm. Oh that's the sorry that's the pond. That's the before and after. So there's the rocks removed. If you look at the previous po photo, the rocks are there. So that's removed. That uh s what do you call that fence? Uh turbidity curtain worked awesome. Uh I got complete video of the removal that nothing went in that pipe. There was uh clear discharge the entire time. As a matter of fact, it's still in there because I'm not um happy with the way it settled right yet. So, as soon as it's it's settled, then we'll consider removing that. But until then, we leave it in place. U that's before. That's what the burm looked like uh before. You've seen that. And now the burm is gone. Uh there's hay bale there. It's seated in hay. in front of the hay bale. The hay bale goes all the way up to the vegetation. So if you're standing at the hay bale looking at the backside, the vegetation is as closest to that hay bale it can get. Hay bail is staked down. Every one of those have one stakes where uh there's potential of water uh coming through uh like a low point. We double stake the hay bale so we make sure it wouldn't come out. Basically, as you can see, that's finished. So, we were able to keep uh vegetation front and back. The only spot we lost the vegetation is where the burm was itself. Um and a little bit in the road where we drove on it. Uh all the

material went to the back. Uh it's it's in a corner. Um it's wood chips and top soil. So, I'm sure it'll be grass and weeds at some point. I'm just looking to um get this behind us um so we can hopefully you know move forward on um bigger and better things.

And just to confirm when I was out there yesterday I did see the boulders had been removed defense was in place. Did see the hay bales that were staked. When I was there he was going he had somebody who was putting down paying over the seated area on the this side of it. I mean the email um at this point back to the commission a little bit on I am satisfied with the work as has been performed here. The order remains in place. The litigation remains in place and again we have to sell here this evening. I don't know what your thoughts are regarding the order in the litigation, but um again, you've seen the work and I can certainly go back out and verify it in a couple weeks to make sure that it's still in good condition, but you know, this is obviously was a big deal for the commission and I want you to have the opportunity to to review it and comment on it before I take any further action.

There was some wetlands restoration on the plan, correct? Um, wasn't there a couple places to Yes. Well, I can look at the order and see what that what that looks. I would ultimately like to use the site at some point. Maybe not right now because we're going to be focused on this, you know, in 15 minutes. Sure. the smaller culvert, but I mean because it was such it's taken so much of this commission's time that I think a final visit for those of us that would like to see it would be good before we decide what we're going to do.

Again, it's your this has been a a large matter for the commission. So, I certainly understand your your desire to go out there and see with your own eyes before you and it be great if like all the weeds are up. Well, we'll see how we do. the weather holds and all the rest of it. Or you can put a meadow mix down. I don't know if you use that kind of seed mix

based on the um what you see there, that vegetation's coming back cuz that was never planted at all anyway. So once we got the stop, we stopped. So all that growth that you see there, none of that was seeded. That was all original plant material that just naturally grew back. And I have full confidence it's going to do it again. We didn't take anything out that wasn't already there. And we kept as much on that when the we would remove the rocks. You could see there's still vegetation on them shoulders. I did the best I can to bring the loader in front of the rocks and roll the rocks up in a loader bucket to keep all that vegetation stable as I could on the banks. So my suggestion, you know, obviously you have your sitewalk set for this month and why don't we give time to to sort of grow in all the rest of it there. So what do you anticipate at your August meeting setting this as a sitewalk after your August meeting? Yeah.

Do a compliance checklist. Yeah. It'd be nice to have a little report from you, Eric, saying, "Yeah, because you visited the site and spend more time, but this has been done. This has been done. when we go out there with your order and I will walk walk the entire site with your order and make sure we're we're ready on the same because you don't want to surprise Mr. Chen with anything just Yeah, I'm inviting you back. I have nothing to worry about. I got my boo.

It's pretty dry out there now. No, at this point there's nothing f you're not taking any further action tonight. We won't pick it back up at the end of the month. My only my only comment on one other thing was you were talking about the fee structure. So you guys don't have to re go back to this fee structure. Just make a 3% per year and you never go back. And you get some funny math too though. this way here. You never get 75.87 cents.

You know, make some structure that that you guys don't have to re revisit it and then you keep up with the times rather than fall behind and then in 10 years you're playing catchup. You already missed the dollars you could add every year. I do it with tenants. Yeah, it's very effective. Big numbers over time and then and then you guys don't have to look at it. Yeah. Well, thank you for the update for the future. Thank you for your time. there again. All right. Thanks again. Have a good night. You too. Take care.

Moving on to item number eight, which is reading and approval of the minutes um for June 24th, 205, the regular meeting. Does anybody have any changes to make to that? Seeing none, I'll make a motion to approve the minutes as written. Second. Thanks, Tom. All those in favor? I Any uh objections or abstensions? Oh, thank you. Okay. All right. One extension and then um so that passes. Then um for the special meeting sitewalk, I'm going to abstain from that since it's not there. So Tom, do you want to take I'll make a motion to uh approve the special meeting sidewalk. Second.

All in favor? I good to go. Um anything else for the good of the order before I make a motion to adjurnn? I was surprised about the green at Sharon Lane. I saw him mowing it today. Literally, I saw guys out there mowing. I didn't think the report was even going to be that good. Almost drove off the road. I'm not sure it's good. I saw a guy with a couple weeks, right? They've got an opportunity to clean the damn basins. Motion to adjurnn. Seconded. Everyone loves it. How are you? Thanks everyone. Thank you.