[0:00] All right, the time is 6:30 and a quorum
being present, I call this meeting to
[0:05] order. First item on the agenda is the
approval of minutes for July 15th and
[0:11] August 12th. Are is there any discussion
for those minutes?
[0:17] They look pretty standard to me.
>> So I will request a motion to approve
[0:22] those minutes.
>> I will make a motion to approve those
[0:25] minutes.
>> Do I have a second?
[0:26] » Second.
>> All those in favor? I chair votes I as
[0:29] well.
>> All right. Agenda um item A is a public
[0:35] hearing a request for determination of
applicability for Isaac Reyes 36 Shady
[0:40] Lane Assessor's map 99 lot 78. This
applicant has requested a continuence to
[0:46] the 916 2026 meeting. Could I have a
motion to continue this to the 916 2026
[0:52] meeting?
>> So moved.
[0:53] » Do I have a second?
>> Second.
[0:55] » All those in favor? I
>> chair [clears throat] votes I as well.
[0:58] Um all right. Agenda item B is a public
hearing request for determination of
[1:03] applicability for PJD. Bernardo 45
McNeel Way assessors map 33 lot 44. Is
[1:10] there anybody here for that? Could you
please come up and then if you just want
[1:15] to introduce yourself and then explain
what this uh RDA is all about.
[1:21] » Hi my name is Jay Henshaw. Actually, I
represent Jiala Pools, which is
[1:25] representing 45 McNail Way. Uh, we're
requesting uh lenience on building an
[1:32] above ground pool. Now, if you've read
the narrative, it's kind of lengthy, so
[1:37] I'll try to shorten it down pretty much.
This entire property is completely
[1:41] surrounded
by wetlands.
[1:45] It's a large property, but very small
usable portion of it. Uh, the homeowners
[1:51] are pretty ecologically
conservative people and they've opted to
[1:56] do an above ground pool for this project
instead of a more, you know, intrusive
[2:00] inground pool. It's a flat property.
It's a small project really 16x 28
[2:08] overall uh ground disturbance. It's
going to be basically just removing sod.
[2:15] Once the sod's removed, [clears throat]
uh we're just going to put down a
[2:18] masonary sand and the pool will sit on
that. the uh
[2:25] the time it'll take and the you know for
a disturbance would be a day.
[2:30] » We'd like to bring in a small mini skid
steer to remove the saw that would be
[2:35] there probably for about 40 to 50
minutes be on the property and then
[2:39] gone.
[2:42] And that's really all there is to it.
We're using a uh we'll be installing a a
[2:47] cartridge system so no back washing, no
water discharge under the ground. What
[2:51] are you planning on doing with the sod?
>> Uh, we'll probably have to take it off
[2:55] off site most likely because I don't see
any place you could we could put it.
[2:58] » Okay. [clears throat]
[3:02] » It's not a lot. So,
>> no.
[3:07] » Uh, cartridge system. Does that mean um
salt water?
[3:10] » No, no, no, no. It just means no. You
don't have to bag wash basic paper
[3:15] filters.
>> Oh, okay.
[3:16] » Well, kind of. Kind of. That sort of.
Yeah, that's the idea. But they're not
[3:20] paper anymore. [clears throat] Fabric
filters to catch it.
[3:23] » It's a basic like it's an air filter.
>> Yeah.
[3:25] » Yeah.
>> Exactly. So there's no you're not
[3:28] discharging water when you're cleaning
the filter. When you use most typical
[3:31] filters, you either if you're using a
sand system, you have to backwash the
[3:35] system, which is reversing the flow of
the water and flushing water out onto
[3:38] the ground. That's treated water, which
you don't want to do with wetlands. Uh
[3:42] same similar thing with DE. You don't
want to be dumping DE into the wetlands,
[3:46] you know, that's never going away.
You know, so cyrs
[3:51] basically uh
non-intrusive,
[3:56] no discharge, no no treated water
>> except for when you winterize the pool,
[4:00] you'll have to pump it down.
>> When we winterize the pool, you have to
[4:03] draw water. Yeah. And you you observe a
dissipation period. So I I agree with I
[4:07] think the narrative of we've run into
this before is we want to pump that or
[4:11] remove it somewhere
um not in the wetlands cuz it is it will
[4:17] be chlorinated water correct in that
pool. Well, what you do is when you just
[4:21] when it's situation like this, you just
observe a certain dissipation period cuz
[4:25] the chlorine will dissipate after.
>> Right. But we don't want it pumped into
[4:30] the
>> No, we wouldn't pump it into the
[4:31] wetlands. And what we do is you're not
draining the pool,
[4:34] » right? No. You drop the water 2 or 3 in.
>> It's not a substantial amount. It's
[4:40] relatively small amount.
>> The pool stays filled basically for the
[4:44] winter.
>> Correct. No, but you still have to drop
[4:46] us again.
>> Yeah. You drop it about 3 or 4 in.
[4:48] » Yep. which is hundreds of gallons.
>> Yeah, probably probably three or 400
[4:53] gallons.
>> Straight volume. But we're just making
[4:55] sure
>> the property owner is aware it's not
[4:59] going to go into the wet vents.
>> No, of course.
[5:01] » Yeah. How many gallons is a pool this
size typically?
[5:07] » 16 28.
[5:11] » A little less than 13,000 gallons.
>> All right. 13,000. But you're
[5:16] [clears throat] saying that not all
13,000 has to be removed every winter to
[5:21] properly winterize.
>> But we're talking about a couple hundred
[5:25] gallons, maybe a thousand or so.
>> I would say in the volume, you're
[5:30] probably looking at a thousand gallons
to dump out of there.
[5:32] » But the the chlorine
um no matter how much you put in there,
[5:39] by the time you're winterizing it, some
of it has dissipated out of the water.
[5:44] That's what you're saying.
>> Most likely all of it.
[5:46] » All right. So,
we still don't want the water dumped,
[5:53] you know, just pumped into the
[clears throat] wetlands or something
[5:56] like that.
>> Uh so that like the standard um you
[6:00] know, special condition of, you know, it
not being uh pumped in the direction of
[6:05] the wetlands, put it in the direction of
um anywhere else. That makes
[6:10] » We understand that. In some cases, maybe
we can uh maybe the homeowner can put in
[6:13] a small drywall to take it.
>> Yeah.
[6:18] » So, are we comfortable with that?
>> I think we just need I think we need to
[6:23] put it in the conditions.
>> Yeah, absolutely. You you you guys
[6:27] agree?
>> Yeah.
[6:29] » Yeah. I've written up a draft condition
I can share with you, but it basically
[6:32] is the same effect as that.
>> Yep.
[6:38] » Um All right. I'm having
trouble finding
[6:44] a um
special condition. [clears throat]
[6:55] I just want to read those out. The
standard um
[7:04] the standard special conditions. Why
can't I
[7:08] just give me a second?
[7:15] I say them roughly 10 times every
meeting. I could probably do it in my
[7:23] sleep. Um
[7:27] but all right I'm going to say for this
uh conditions may include or shall
[7:34] include the applicant shall install and
maintain perimeter controls around the
[7:38] area of work to prevent the deposition
of debris into nearby resource areas.
[7:42] Perimeter control shall act in um rem
perimeter control shall remain in place
[7:47] until all areas of erodable materials
have been stabilized at the site. These
[7:52] controls shall act as a limit of work.
No equipment can be stored or work done
[7:55] past that point. Prior to any
construction activity commencing, the
[7:59] following must be completed. ESC's shall
be installed by the applicant or an
[8:03] agent of the applicant and the
conservation agent shall inspect and
[8:07] approve uh the installed ESC's. And then
um in addition to that,
[8:14] how are we going to phrase this? the the
um the any water drained out of the
[8:23] » any water discharge.
>> This is sort of a draft, but if this if
[8:26] you feel like commissioner feels like
that language is too uh restrictive, I
[8:30] can address it before issuance. I think
any water discharge needed.
[8:35] » So this says in perpetuity all water
drained from the above ground pool
[8:39] structure in order to close it over
winter shall be siphoned and disposed of
[8:44] offsite by a professional pool company.
Due to the proximity of the proposed uh
[8:48] pool to wetland resource areas,
salinized and/or chlorinated water may
[8:53] cause significant damage to wetland
vegetation and fauna. The applicant
[8:57] shall submit a yearly copy of any
invoices paid for pool closing services
[9:01] provided to the conservation agent.
Failure to submit said documentation or
[9:06] its equivalent within a timely fashion
no later than October 31st of each
[9:10] calendar year shall be considered a
violation of the conditions um of this
[9:14] determination of applicability. So I
think we've agreed that that's a little
[9:20] bit above and beyond what we would like
to see. Uh but all water drained from
[9:26] the above ground pool um structure in
order to um close it over winter shall
[9:34] be uh drained
away from the wetlands. Um and I guess
[9:43] any indication that there is
um chlorinated or salinated water going
[9:50] into the wetlands causing um issues
um will be a violation notice that they
[9:56] will be they'll have to take care of. Is
that
[10:00] » do you all right that's adequate for us?
>> Yeah, I think it's adequate. It's not
[10:06] going to be a way to see that unless
it's reported by a neighbor though. you
[10:09] know, isolated wetland area.
>> I think we just kind of put as
[10:14] pract practical. I mean, you're going to
pump a line, you're just going to let it
[10:17] go back to the earth. Traditionally, let
sand do its filter job. Yeah.
[10:21] » We don't recommend the use of saline
systems and swimming pools anyway.
[10:25] » And just uh if it eases anybody's mind,
the amount of chlorine that is used to
[10:31] maintain a swimming pool is really very
very small.
[10:34] » Now, we're uh way less than
>> I'm pretty familiar with the costs per
[10:37] million. Um I'm just
>> we just have to treat this with cuz it
[10:43] it's in a very
>> Yeah.
[10:46] » interesting area.
>> Um so we're given on the you know the
[10:51] location. We just want to make sure
we're protecting our resources.
[10:56] » Um all right. So
those are the proposed those are the
[11:02] special conditions. Um, I'm going to
find this once again.
[11:10] Just give me one second.
Um, so
[11:16] this is a public hearing. If there's
anybody in the public who would like to
[11:20] uh make a comment, now is the time to do
so. But not seeing anybody rise. Could I
[11:27] have a motion to close the public
hearing?
[11:29] » So motion.
>> Do I have a second?
[11:31] » Second.
>> All those in favor? I
[11:33] » I
>> chair votes I as well. And could I have
[11:36] a motion for a negative determination of
applicability as discussed at this
[11:41] meeting?
>> Uh I'll make that motion.
[11:44] » Do I have a second?
>> Second.
[11:45] » All those in favor?
>> I I
[11:47] » chair votes I as well.
>> Thank you very much.
[11:49] » Thank you.
>> Have a good night.
[11:52] » Thank you. Um before we move on, I just
want Yeah. Here. Um so one of the things
[11:58] I noticed in your um u memo was that
like we do allow certain things um you
[12:06] know to be you know in the no build
zone. Um, [laughter] I think before the
[12:12] end of this meeting, we should have a
discussion about um a quick discussion
[12:16] about u updating the bylaw to allow
um pools within this zone as part of the
[12:25] other structures but with conditions
attached to it about how we would be
[12:30] comfortable about approving those and
stuff. So, I just want to bring that up
[12:34] now so we can have a discussion.
>> And I'll add a note to that. If we're
[12:37] going to start looking at the bylaws, I
think we need to get a ahead of the
[12:42] lithium battery battery.
>> All right. Y
[12:45] » what other towns cuz we're seeing all
sorts of stuff. So I think that needs to
[12:50] be part of our bylaw uh review, too.
>> All right. So, um
[12:55] » because it's a different threat than
we're used to.
[12:57] » Yeah, I I I get that. But um All right.
So um and we we can put this as a future
[13:04] agenda item on other um stuff that might
be a little bit both of these might be a
[13:09] little bit bigger uh you know
discussions
[13:13] I just wanted to get the just get the
conversation started.
[13:20] » All right moving on. Um, agenda item C
is a public hearing, a request for
[13:25] determination of applicability for Nick
and Kimucher
[13:30] 221 Mitchell G Drive, Assessor's Map 87,
lot 61. I'm sorry if I said your name.
[13:36] » Oh, no, that's all good. [laughter]
>> How you doing tonight?
[13:40] » Pretty good. How are you?
>> Good.
[13:41] » Need you to introduce yourself for the
record and then explain what you plan on
[13:46] doing.
>> My name is uh Nicholas Buché. I am the
[13:48] owner of Contour Building and Remodeling
[clears throat] and I'm
[13:53] looking for uh relief. We are building
uh proposing to build a um 24x [snorts]
[14:00] 32 um attached garage to the left-hand
side of the property [snorts] which
[14:05] abuts the town of Tukberry's property.
Um,
[14:10] it's it's just a garage, drive-in garage
with a massive bedroom above. Um, you
[14:15] know, your typical concrete foundation,
freeze, frost wall. Um, it's pretty
[14:21] straightforward. Um,
so that's that's about the project.
[14:27] » All right. [laughter]
Um
[14:30] so the there's a a lot of discussion
about the um
[14:38] the basin or the the the drainage
easement that is um my understanding is
[14:44] that it was built before uh 1996
the November 18th 1996.
[14:53] Therefore, it qualifies as a
naturalized. It's in our jurisdiction.
[14:58] Um, so what I don't see on the um plot
plan or you know the addition is where
[15:08] that actual um you know where the
wetland boundaries are. Um so I I think
[15:15] that to me would be very beneficial to
see exactly how far away these things
[15:21] are on a map and stuff. It doesn't have
to be perfect, but like you know
[15:24] something uh to that effect.
>> So my question is so it was back then in
[15:28] 1996 it was a storm water runoff. Does
that automatically make that wetlands in
[15:35] the back?
>> Cuz I actually met with the engineer who
[15:39] designed that property [snorts] and
they've we've uploaded his letter to you
[15:43] tonight. Um, and when he met with the
original developer and with the town
[15:49] engineer, it was never designed to be
wetlands. So, does it automatically
[15:54] get classified as wetlands?
>> Nick, I wasn't able to upload that uh
[15:58] just now. So, if you want to share that
>> copies of that?
[16:01] » Um, yeah, Nick has an email from Joe
Seraku, who I guess was the the old town
[16:06] engineer. um you know indicating that he
he believes that the storm water system
[16:12] and you know the houses in that area
wouldn't have been built until after um
[16:17] that 1996 date. But you know everything
that I've been able to find is that the
[16:22] the design is from January of '95.
Uh all the houses that house um has a
[16:28] mortgage dated sometime in 1995. Um, so
[clears throat] everything that I I've
[16:34] been able to uncover has pointed to it
having been built before 1996 and
[16:39] therefore being a naturalized um
resource area at this point. Uh, the
[16:44] project is about, I think we measured
it. It's about 70 ft from the the center
[16:50] line of the, you know, the the stream or
the the outlet. Um, you know, we we just
[16:56] used a rough tape measure while we were
out there. And you know, I think if it
[17:00] is a wetland, you would delineate that
from the, you know, the mean annual high
[17:04] water or the the bank. Um, so that would
probably be closer to like 65 60 ft. Um,
[17:12] so outside of the no build zone, but
still definitely in the buffer zone um
[17:16] to that area. So I guess my
understanding of all of this was that if
[17:22] it's been maintained as a drainage, you
know, it, you know, nothing has grown
[17:28] there, then it's still just that it
doesn't automatically become considered
[17:36] naturalized wetlands. If it doesn't have
the characteristics of the wetlands,
[17:40] » yeah, in my my view, it does have the
characteristics of a wetland. Uh, you
[17:45] know, I went out in the, uh, August, you
know, I think it was during a period of
[17:49] drought and it was still, uh, you can
see from the pictures, uh, there's a
[17:53] clear water flow, um, you know, line.
You can see the wet soil. Doesn't
[17:58] really, it's not even a mapped easement
on the town's website, so I don't know
[18:02] if it's one that has been maintained.
Um, and it was, you know, grown in with
[18:07] jeweleed, which is a, you know, a native
plant. Um so not looking like there's a
[18:14] lot of u been a lot of maintenance from
my view but uh that's you know certainly
[18:20] up for interpretation.
>> So I mean looking at the pictures not
[18:26] being a wetland scientist it does look
like a wetland to me. It's clearly not
[18:33] just you know grass and uh you know
culvert or something like that. Um, so
[18:41] but I I guess you're bringing up the,
you know, when the site was approved
[18:46] versus when it was actually built,
>> right?
[18:49] » I don't know how to interpret that
without something without some
[18:54] documentation showing,
>> you know, like the ideal thing would be
[18:59] somebody holding up a newspaper after
having just built it. That seems
[19:03] unrealistic. So,
>> and that's what I was running into
[19:06] because I did go to to the uh DPW to
speak to the engineer and he agreed too.
[19:12] He's like, "We have no paperwork."
>> And so, I don't know where I'm supposed
[19:15] to get this paperwork for besides hire
an environmental engineer. But on the
[19:18] flip side to this, on every neighbor
that is around this, I pulled the files
[19:23] with Sam at the building department. And
there's been uh since the last one was
[19:27] 2015, there was permits issued at both
properties
[19:31] all the way around. There's this
everyone has pools, sheds, decks,
[19:36] fences, additions, and they've all been
approved all the way up to 2013.
[19:40] Actually 15, I think, is the one we
found.
[19:44] » Yeah, I I remember
>> when we pulled the files. So, that's why
[19:46] I was just on this one here.
[clears throat] I was just looking. I'm
[19:49] like, well, I get it. I understand
there's something there that we have to
[19:53] deal with, but I also look at the
history of all the surrounding neighbors
[19:57] and the exact budding neighbor next
door. and those building permits issued
[20:01] and conservation signed off.
>> So I guess the
[20:08] something like a shed or a fence would
either be by right or
[20:12] » ground pool next door.
>> Yeah. So that that would either be by
[20:16] right or an RDA. Um we're talking about
an ADU.
[20:20] » This is not an ADU.
I I
[20:26] was under the assumption of
>> it's uh yeah basically that was my
[20:29] interpretation but it's basic you said
it's a garage with a
[20:32] » it's a master bedroom above a garage and
ADU classified with a kitchen.
[20:36] » Yep. Okay. So you know it is a it's an
addition. It's an addition.
[20:42] Um
[20:45] » All right.
>> And that would also have another music
[20:47] egress if it was an ADU. This would just
be a garage into the existing garage
[20:52] that we're going to build next to.
And I like I said, I I this is I was
[20:57] raising that concern when I met with Sam
at the building department just because
[21:00] there is an ingground pool next door.
And um this uh not this c this
[21:04] homeowner, but the previous home owner
to this property. There's a sun room
[21:07] that was added. There was a deck that
was added and it was all signed off by
[21:11] the conservation committee uh department
when they did these building permits.
[21:25] It's
24 by 32. That's
[21:29] » That's
[21:32] » And you going for variance on setbacks,
too? I
[21:34] » already got approved. [clears throat]
[21:38] » And the above ground swimming pool is
already there. Is that
[21:41] » That is existing.
>> That's existing.
[21:50] Um yeah, I don't know if the members of
the commission were able to review the
[21:54] attachment that's the plan from um of
the drainage from 1995 does show sort of
[21:59] the path of uh of that drainage channel
part of a more extensive
[22:04] » system that you provided with the
mortgage. Uh traditionally they don't
[22:08] issue mortgages on houses that aren't
built.
[22:10] » That was the information I got from
>> from the building department. Yeah. Um,
[22:14] so that [clears throat] I have to
have to agree with the timeline ties in.
[22:21] [clears throat]
Um, because if it would be anything, it
[22:24] would be a construction loan, not a
mortgage.
[22:27] Um,
[22:31] yeah. So, I mean, my interpretation is
that it is a resource area. Um, it's,
[22:35] you know, the commission's discretion
whether this activity is significant,
[22:39] you know, would alter that area. um and
you know and in that case should require
[22:44] a notice of intent. So I guess that's
the the question.
[22:49] » Yeah, it's like I'm trying to
>> we can't look at what else has been
[22:55] approved by other people. We have to
look at what we're looking at in my
[22:58] opinion
>> and I agree with you 100%. I was just
[23:00] pointing the fact no I
>> you know I just see all this and and
[23:03] that was not just this house and the one
next door that is the next three on the
[23:08] other side too and one of them just put
a substantial addition in on the against
[23:13] the same area you know
[23:20] » it's the to me what what's getting to me
is the size of the addition
[23:27] um like
just something of this, you know, size.
[23:32] I'm used to it being an NOI. Um, and
with, you know, but we went within the
[23:39] 24. We actually, this addition was
larger. We scaled it down just because
[23:43] of having the, you know, finding that
there was we're going to need a variance
[23:46] anyways. We didn't want to be that close
to the property line. And at 24 ft for
[23:51] two cars is pretty tight. Um, generally
a standard size garage is 26 ft wide. So
[23:58] we shorten this up to 24. That's why we
went back 32 just give a little bit of
[24:02] depth so we could fit.
[24:07] » And all right. So [clears throat]
Sam from like from the plot plan that
[24:15] they provided where is the actual
drainage?
[24:21] » We measured that drain is 90 ft from the
back corner of that garage.
[24:28] That was the back corner. And then we
did say, you know, coming 24 ft to the
[24:32] the front.
>> At what angle they were holding it, I
[24:34] mean, I guess if I was to swing in the
tape one way, I could get to, but the
[24:39] furthest I went back when I met with Joe
Saw Walker, the civil engineer, we had
[24:42] 90 ft,
[24:46] » 90 ft from the wetland or
>> 100 foot buffer zone.
[24:51] » So, so the wetland begins, you know, for
all intents and purposes at the outlet
[24:55] of the pipe. Um, and so I measured
basically from the top of that concrete.
[25:00] I I remember as getting, you know,
mental math to to about 70 ft to the
[25:06] actual like closest corner. Maybe
there's some flexibility there, but um I
[25:11] would say the wetland system probably
does extend out towards the property
[25:16] another 3 to 4. You know, it's difficult
to say um cuz it had been really not
[25:21] raining recently, so I was only able to
see just where the water had settled. I
[25:25] would imagine, you know, 3 or 4 foot
wide um you know at that point and then
[25:31] it it does look like it branches out
into a larger system. At least it was
[25:35] planned to um you know with the drainage
that drainage plan um you know it is
[25:40] grown in with trees. So I don't know how
um often the back portion would be
[25:45] inundated but um
>> and I guess so my next question for the
[25:50] commission is that this is
where this, you know, drainage is
[25:58] happening. It's the town of Tukberry's
property. Not only that, but it's under
[26:03] our consu conservation.
So, like,
[26:08] what is the consequences of allowing
something like this to go through as an
[26:15] RDA? What are we doing to our property
right now? Um, you know, it's it's a
[26:22] large addition,
you know, I mean, looking at it from the
[26:27] rest of the um the house, there's other
stuff around there. There's the swimming
[26:33] pool, there's the playground, there's
the shed, all those things are pretty
[26:36] small.
um the additional runoff like I I
[26:40] personally don't think it's that big
like you know it's it's a considerable
[26:47] size up from the existing structure but
um it's not like they're
[26:54] you know proposing to cover the entire
property
[26:58] » and we're willing to work with you I
mean whatever we need for barriers you
[27:02] know flushing our concrete we already
have that established what we're doing
[27:05] that's being hauled off site There only
will be a small amount of fill to back
[27:10] fill, but the rest is hauled away. Also,
we're doing everything in our power
[27:14] because it is, you know, the town's
property next door to make sure there is
[27:17] nothing over there at all. Um, but we
would take any recommendations from the
[27:21] board, too, if there's anything else
additional you want us to do.
[27:27] » So, Daniel, concerned about additional
flooding of that property. Well, I mean,
[27:31] so I I guess to to backtrack a tiny bit,
I'm saying that as the property owner,
[27:40] that's a concern that I've seen many
times. People build a, you know, their
[27:45] ne, you know, there's a new house being
built and they go, "Oh my god, this is
[27:48] going to flood my basement." Now, we are
in that position where we're the de
[27:54] facto owners of this property. We are
the neighbors right here.
[28:01] like we don't have a house right here.
So the the issues of any additional
[28:08] flooding, are we concerned with that?
Like what's the let's play worst case
[28:14] scenario where this is pitched in such a
way that all additional storm water is
[28:19] going straight into our property. Are we
concerned?
[28:24] I'm not super concerned. It's a big
addition, but it's not so big. And it's
[28:31] it's a naturalized wetland, but it's a
wetland. It's, you know, gathering that
[28:36] water already. Um, you know, am I I
guess am I sounding like a crazy person
[28:43] by being concerned about this?
>> I think it should have an NOA.
[28:48] » You think it should be an NI?
>> I think this should we should know where
[28:50] it is.
>> Delineate it. I don't see a problem with
[28:55] this, but I think
We're
[28:57] » got a qu. So if we have to get that, is
that the town's responsibility to update
[29:01] the records on that or do we have to
find that?
[29:04] » That would be you and we're not
proposing to build anything. So
[29:08] » no, I know. But so I I guess way I'm
asking that question is like if the town
[29:12] had to do road work and adjust that sink
basin one day, that would have to
[29:16] probably come to conservation.
>> Correct. Yeah.
[29:18] » So they would have to find it if it was
this town doing the work. Correct.
[29:22] Well, if they need if they need to do
it, they would come to us with the plan
[29:26] unless it was an emergency repair.
Correct.
[29:28] » Yeah, that's
>> um and they notify us they're working in
[29:32] the the buffer zone or wherever they
are.
[29:35] » Yeah,
>> cuz we've gone high and low looking for
[29:37] this paperwork. I mean, I've been to
engineering, I've been to your office,
[29:41] I've been everywhere to try to find this
and then when I stumbled upon the actual
[29:44] engineering, it's like it was all proof.
Like, [laughter] and I get what you're
[29:48] saying. But
>> yeah, I think the reason the reason I
[29:51] would like to see it as an NOA because
then we would actually know
[29:56] » it would be labeled and it's on a plan.
>> So
[30:00] yeah, I can tell you right where the
literally the town of Turk is written on
[30:04] this plot plan. That's where that pipe
is. If you you can see the drain in the
[30:07] street and she goes straight back. It's
exactly right there. I think we've kind
[30:11] of measured that out. But I understand
you probably need a document. But
[30:16] » yeah, that but we did find it. I would
feel I would feel better and then we can
[30:20] just you know it's flagged we know the
location.
[30:24] » Yeah. So I mean
I I don't want to insinuate that the
[30:30] only difference between an NOI and an
RDA is having that detailed u um you
[30:36] know wetland delineation.
But I would feel a lot more comfortable
[30:42] regardless of what type of permit it is
to have at least a better idea something
[30:48] because right now I I you know not that
I don't trust what you're saying but we
[30:54] don't have anything in the records that
we can look back on and go all right we
[30:58] all agree that this is exactly where you
know the the wetland delineation would
[31:04] be going. anything count with
conservation coming out to verify it
[31:08] with me?
>> So, I mean that's where it gets tricky
[31:11] is that like you know we're
>> we found
[31:15] » we're not experts open like [laughter]
we should really have a wetland
[31:20] scientist if we're doing everything you
know exactly as it should would get a
[31:24] wetland scientist to go out and
delineate everything. um because of the
[31:30] nature like you know it's that tricky
thing of this is a naturalized wetland
[31:36] over a natural wetland how much we want
to do that um is there a way to find for
[31:44] the neighbors that have pulled all the
permits that recently that they may have
[31:46] that too I mean it's it's they had to go
through the same process here
[31:53] I mean they that pool was just put in
2018 so they had to come here
[32:00] » that I mean it's literally right next to
it's the abuing property.
[32:03] » We could make a motion to continue and
do some homework
[32:08] » to try to avoid
>> Are you Are you looking for the
[32:11] delineation? What What documentation are
reop?
[32:13] » Well, yeah. If the abuing neighbor has
had permits pulled and they've had
[32:16] additions and pools put in, they've had
to then deal with the same exact issue
[32:20] we're doing because it's literally the
abuing neighbor.
[32:24] » I mean, that would all be
That would all be public record.
[32:28] » Yeah. And the thing is the town has
nothing, no files on anything, but
[32:33] conservation did sign off
>> from 2018 on that pool permit.
[32:39] » Yes,
>> that would be my question. I I guess
[32:42] » I mean, we found all the records for it
and that's and I'm not being frustrated
[32:45] with you guys. I just, you know,
understand I'm looking at this like,
[32:48] well, how did all this work get done? If
this is now an issue, but how did all
[32:51] this other work get done? And I'm fine
with a continuence and I understand but
[32:55] » Well, I'm just trying to do it on your
benefit.
[32:56] » Yeah. No, I'm saying that's good. I'm
saying
[32:59] » I don't have to say to you, look, we
want an NOI versus an RDA.
[33:02] » Yeah. Yeah. No, I'm I'm agreeing with
you 100%. I'm just at some point
[33:05] somebody had to come to the conservation
committee and discuss this project and
[33:10] the same issue that we're having. But
you're saying that all of those they
[33:16] there's signed off
>> the sign off we we have the permit you
[33:20] know application with 199
other paperwork can be found
[33:27] » zero
zero they only have the building permits
[33:30] that have all been signed off by every
department they have plans that were
[33:34] submitted plot plans that were submitted
as builts that were submitted all of
[33:39] it's been signed off
>> so I
[33:43] You have plot plans that were submitted
>> and none of those show any sort of
[33:47] wetland delineation.
>> None.
[33:49] » No, the uh the area is not mapped on the
town software as a wetland. It's not um
[33:54] mapped as an easement, a drainage
easement. I just basically in doing my
[33:58] desktop review said that looks like a
wetland and it went out and it was
[34:02] wetland. Um, so I I don't know that it
was, you know, if a preliminary desktop
[34:08] review was all that happened, I don't
know that it was would have been caught
[34:11] by anyone previously.
>> But if we're going from 96 to 2018,
[34:16] that's a long time and that's a lot of
permits that were opened.
[34:23] Somebody had to catch it at some point
or if it was an issue, bring it up.
[34:30] » All right. So I I guess at this point,
you know, regardless of what type of
[34:36] permit submitted, I would like the
applicant to provide us with something
[34:43] that shows
the where the wetland starts and then we
[34:50] can look at that and go, all right, 100
ft from there is the buffer zone. Um,
[34:57] ideally it would be a wetland scientist
>> that would provide a full delineation of
[35:02] this given the history of this. I would
be comfortable with just something on
[35:09] record that we can agree this is the
line where it goes. Are you is everybody
[35:15] else comfortable with that? That's where
I'm kind of
[35:18] » as long as they're credible,
>> you know, and if if in the future, I
[35:22] mean, what that means is if if you just,
you know, if you take this plot plan
[35:28] » and you just draw a squiggly line on it
and you say that is what it is and we
[35:33] all agree that's where it is, it's you
taking the risk that someday there will
[35:38] be a delineation
>> and it would show that you falsified
[35:42] that and stuff. So that that's what I'm
>> doing that.
[35:45] » Yeah. [laughter]
So I I I just want everybody to be like
[35:48] we're all in good faith that this is
where we think
[35:51] » and I can find that really quickly. I
mean if you even need me to have the old
[35:55] town engineer come out with me and plot
it right onto that plot plan that line
[36:00] from is it from the opening of the pipe
in the woods? Is that what I'm going off
[36:04] of?
>> Yeah. Yeah. I feel like I could probably
[36:08] flag it based on slope and you know the
characteristics there. I could help with
[36:12] that, but it's yeah, up to the
commission on what they're looking for.
[36:15] Um I think
>> I mean I have no problem going out there
[36:18] flagging it. Meet somebody out there and
go over it. I I'm going to be honest.
[36:21] The thing is we're just under the gun
cuz it's getting closer to it's getting
[36:25] late to start cutting foundations
>> and we're trying to get this done. Um
[36:29] there's a few things going on at the
home. So I'm just trying to
[36:32] » and I understand we have to go through
this process and I'm not trying to rush
[36:35] anybody, but we're just getting close to
getting this thing in between. We still
[36:39] have to wait for our 20-day cool off
period from zoning. We've been approved
[36:42] over there already. So, I'm just trying
to get that cut in and follow whatever
[36:47] you guys need us to do.
>> So, I guess at this point,
[36:53] I would entertain a motion to continue
for them to be able to update paperwork
[37:00] to give us some idea of where the actual
drainage is. And you know, we can
[37:06] estimate where the wetland buffer zones
are. Is that
[37:11] » I think that's a fair
>> Yeah, that's fair.
[37:14] » There's no record of the drainage system
>> in the town and DPW has nothing.
[37:20] » There's no records of any maintenance,
but there is that um initial plan from
[37:24] 1995.
>> Okay.
[37:25] » Um that just shows it does kind of show
where the wetland would be. you know, it
[37:30] shows the grading to make the detention
basin and the um you know, the flow
[37:35] path. So, uh you know, I would expect
that the wetland system would pretty
[37:40] much follow that.
>> Yeah. Okay.
[37:44] » All right. Um so, would that mean coming
back to conservation next month? Is that
[37:49] » Yes. On the 16th?
>> 16th of
[37:53] October.
>> Yeah. September.
[37:54] » September.
>> September.
[37:55] » Two weeks. Yeah.
>> September 16th. Okay.
[38:00] All right. Could I have a motion to
continue
[38:03] uh this public hearing request for
determination uh request of
[38:08] applicability to the next meeting on
September 16th, 2026?
[38:14] » So moved.
>> Do I have a second? Second. All those in
[38:16] favor.
>> I chair votes I as well.
[38:19] » Just to clarify with the board, that is
me meeting just updating this block
[38:22] plan. Correct.
>> Yeah. I I just
[38:24] » Right. I I would like to make sure Sam
would agree with the flagging in
[38:31] principle. Is that fair? Fair fair.
>> Sure. Yeah. Um yeah, I'm happy to go out
[38:36] and uh once once you have it put
forward, I'll go out and take a look. Um
[38:41] » so I'll flag it and have you verify. Is
that
[38:45] » whatever? I guess I I don't know what
whatever the commission feels most
[38:48] appropriate. Um I I feel
>> before this continues. Uh can I have a
[38:53] motion to reopen?
>> Sorry. I want to have clarification.
[38:57] Sorry.
>> Um can I just have a motion to reopen?
[39:01] » Do I have a second?
>> Second.
[39:03] » All those in favor? I
>> chair votes eye. All right. So you can
[39:06] go and flag it and Sam, you'll do
another site inspection and verify
[39:14] um where
the flags are. Are you comfortable with
[39:19] that? Like you're, you know, I'm not
sure if we're asking you to do too much
[39:24] that like I know you're not a wetland
scientist. Like, so
[39:27] » Well, yeah. I mean, I know Nick uh
probably also
[39:30] » Yeah.
>> not a wetland scientist.
[39:32] » Yeah. [laughter]
>> So, I don't know if it's um if it just
[39:35] makes more more sense for for me to to
do it. Um Nick could be present or
[39:41] » I'd like I'd like to be there and then
we could just So, we're just marking the
[39:44] pipe, correct?
marking the boundaries of the wetland, I
[39:49] would assume.
>> Yeah. Okay. Um, so that would yeah just
[39:53] involve walking basically through the
ditch and um I'll have to get some PVC
[39:58] flagging, but it's something that I can
is doable.
[40:00] » All right. Do you mind doing it?
>> No. No, not at all. Um,
[40:04] » I'll buy you a coffee. We'll do this.
>> All right. Um, and just to be clear,
[40:10] this is not a full
delineation that we would typically get.
[40:15] This is very informal. We just want
>> No, I appreciate that and I appreciate
[40:19] looking at what I was trying to explain
to you from past projects. I just just
[40:23] trying to make it fair for me too. Like
[laughter]
[40:26] so I thank you for uh being lenient with
us and working with us on this.
[40:29] » All right. At this point, I'm going to
ask for another motion um to continue
[40:35] this public hearing request for
determination of applicability to the uh
[40:39] September 16th meeting.
>> So moved.
[40:42] » Do I have a second?
>> Second.
[40:43] » All those in favor? I
>> chair votes I as well. Thank you very
[40:46] much.
>> Have a great night.
[40:53] » Thank you.
>> Thanks everybody.
[40:58] » All right.
Um we have agenda item D, emergency
[41:03] certification for Walter and Patricia um
Mark Kenowitch.
[41:09] [laughter]
>> I was trying to figure it out. I'm
[41:12] hoping that I said that right. Uh for 99
Roger Street. Um this is I forget. Is
[41:19] this tree removal or is this uh
>> this is a failed septic
[41:23] » 905?
>> Yep. Um and the wetlands Yeah. very
[41:26] visible from the road. So uh place
conditions on that. Uh so I'd request
[41:30] the commission move to ratify that.
[41:36] » Seems pretty standard. Yep.
We encourage surge.
[41:42] » Yeah.
>> All right. Um, if there's no further
[41:48] discussion, could I have a motion to
ratify the emergency certification?
[41:53] » I'll make that motion.
>> Do I have a second?
[41:55] » Second.
>> All those in favor?
[41:56] » I.
>> Chair votes I as well. Agenda item E is
[42:00] a uh enforcement order for Joe and
Patricia Lazaro for 350 Pinnacle Street.
[42:06] So, this is tree cutting. Um my
understanding is that there was
[42:11] essentially a a larger tree that was
removed and a few smaller trees. You
[42:17] went out there, you stopped, they
stopped um all activity. Um,
[42:23] so I guess like
the the enforcement order,
[42:30] the the this the pictures I you know
that um were provided
[42:36] um the
[42:40] the the the
two there's a pretty rough looking stump
[42:48] um and then a another stump dump that
was a bit bigger. Um,
[42:55] you know, the the activity has stopped.
I guess
[43:00] do we
trying to get a, you know, scope or a
[43:06] sense of how much clearing was done? It
doesn't seem like it was a ton. Uh, but
[43:13] it it was more than nothing. Um, you
know, it's
[43:21] » Was this Was this a Good Samaritan phone
call?
[43:27] » It Yeah, it's so it's been suggested
that it was a sort of an I I don't know
[43:32] who who the phone calls from, but it was
Yeah, it was reported to me. Um,
[43:35] » anonymous reporting.
>> Anonymous reporting. Uh, take it
[43:39] take whatever that means. But, um,
basically, yeah, I was called out there.
[43:43] Um most of the vegetation that was
removed was like vining material. So it
[43:48] was a lot of um grape and um
bittersweet. So you know the landowner
[43:54] expressed concern over the health of the
trees.
[43:58] It you know would have been something I
think was roughly equivalent in that
[44:01] sense to like vista pruning which could
have been you know proved through an
[44:06] RDA. Um it is you know definitely within
the 25 foot no disturb zone uh
[44:12] especially in in one area um where I I'd
taken the picture but you know a portion
[44:18] of that was in the 25 ft uh no disturb
zone um there were I think definitely
[44:25] like two trees that were removed.
Another stump that I took a picture of
[44:31] the way it was sprouting it seemed like
it was probably um like a grape vine
[44:34] like a large woody vine. Um,
[clears throat] but there was definitely
[44:38] two that I think were probably red
maples that were one of them was was
[44:43] leaning quite substantially towards, you
know, the house, which um is a
[44:48] consideration, but uh the the landowner
said basically and and she did bring me
[44:53] the uh the invoice and the the contract
that she had and the work prop uh
[44:59] proposed was supposed to be limited to
just um vine removal. you know, there
[45:04] wasn't any uh sign on for for tree
removal. You said that was provided by
[45:08] the uh you know, just the contractors
while they were out there and observed
[45:12] them. So,
I uh I just chose to initially
[45:17] uh issue a cease and desist, have them
stop work and they cleaned up and and
[45:21] moved out. But um if the commission was
wanting to uh require further
[45:26] restoration or or planting of trees or
shrubs um certainly within your uh your
[45:31] jurisdiction, your power to do so. Um
just uh yeah I think uh felt confident
[45:39] in my discussion with the the land owner
and with the scope of work that um they
[45:44] would come back in you know to the
commission in the future and and um you
[45:48] know that it could be just like a a
first warning I guess with a a sort of
[45:52] limited
>> learn
[45:54] » lesson learned potentially. I I
>> looking at the photos, it seems like I
[45:58] like I don't really know what we would
be restoring if we requested if we, you
[46:04] know, needed a restoration plan.
>> I I agree with you. I think common sense
[46:08] is they got a lesson. We're not going to
we don't know for sure.
[46:13] » Yeah.
>> What left there. So, I say we
[46:17] » Yeah. Yeah. And I'll just say I think
like
[46:19] » in terms of depth they knocked a few
feet back of that was it seemed to just
[46:24] be all the material I was looking at was
either grape or bittersweet. It was
[46:28] vining material
>> invasive vines.
[46:30] » Yeah. Yeah. Grape is like you know
technically native but it is a nuisance
[46:35] um in many in many ways. Um
>> yeah I said we don't complicate their
[46:39] lives anymore.
>> Yeah. I mean it's just unfortunate
[46:41] because like if they came through as an
RDA like would anybody have
[46:46] » like you know it would have been a very
simple thing but like you is this what
[46:52] Abigail had done tried to talk to some
of these tree vendors for the old upsell
[46:56] the neighbor has a tree
>> she did two um sessions for tree vendors
[47:02] » exactly this oh hey we can take that one
down you know um [clears throat]
[47:08] » so anyway lesson learned
Um,
[47:10] » yep. I think so. And and the landowner
also I don't, you know, express that
[47:14] they had called the town a few times and
there might have been a transition or
[47:16] might might not have been somebody. Um,
so I think that's just another reason to
[47:22] sort of
>> slap on the wrist and, you know, if if
[47:24] something does happen in the future,
then we can look back on it. But, um,
[47:29] » okay.
>> My recommendation.
[47:30] » All right. So, luckily we don't get a
tremendous amount of enforcement orders.
[47:37] Can you remind me about how we need to
close this out? Do we ratify enforcement
[47:43] orders or do we
>> Yeah, I've just written up a document to
[47:47] have have you signed as the chair. Um
there's not really a formal if you would
[47:50] make a motion to to ratify it and then I
have something for you to sign to
[47:54] basically be on the record.
>> All right. So, I'll take a motion to
[47:58] ratify the enforcement order. Um and
hopefully it doesn't come back unless
[48:03] it's an RDA.
>> So moved. Do I have a second?
[48:07] » Second.
>> All those in favor? I
[48:09] » votes I as well.
>> All right. Um, agenda [clears throat]
[48:14] item F is a public hearing notice of
intent and land disturbance permit for
[48:18] Marberg
1777 LLC 1777 Main Street, assessor's
[48:24] map 85, lot 1 D file number 305-1233.
Um the applicant is requesting it uh to
[48:34] continue until the September um 16th
meeting. I just want to bring up that uh
[48:41] Linda and Tom, you both went out and did
a site visit with them.
[48:45] » All right. So I I let's just keep that
fresh in our mind so when they come I I
[48:50] want to hear more about it, but without
the applicant being here, you know,
[48:55] let's not talk about
>> with us. He's been out. You've been out
[48:58] there twice, right?
>> Mhm. Yeah.
[49:00] » Y
>> um All right. So, I'll take a motion to
[49:04] continue that to the um September 16th,
2026 meeting.
[49:08] » I'll make a motion.
>> Do I have a second?
[49:10] » Second.
>> All those in favor?
[49:12] » I chair I as well.
>> Uh agenda item G, public hearing, major
[49:16] land disturbance uh for uh ETS, Inc. 600
Wuburn Street, Assessor's Map uh 3, lot
[49:25] 82. applicant uh has requested a
continuation into the September 16th,
[49:31] 2026 meeting. Um
not much to say about this one either.
[49:38] Uh could I have a motion to continue
this to the September 16th, 2026
[49:43] meeting?
>> So moved.
[49:44] » Do I have a second?
>> Second.
[49:46] » All those in favor?
>> I chair votes I as well. Agenda item H
[49:50] is
the same property public hearing notice
[49:55] of intent Gene Sullivan 600 Wuburn
Street assessor's map 3 lot 82 DP file
[50:00] number 305-1231.
[50:04] Um could I have a motion to continue
this to the September 16th, 2026
[50:10] meeting?
>> Do I have a second?
[50:12] » Second.
>> All those in favor?
[50:13] » I
chair U votes I as well. Um, all right.
[50:19] Public hearing, notice of intent and
land disturbance permit, uh, and land
[50:23] disturbance, uh, for Tyler Ryan, 7375
Hillman, street assessor's map 35, lot 6
[50:29] DP file number 305-123,
uh,2. Now, I hate to do this to you,
[50:36] Dennis, out of an abundance of caution,
you've recused yourself from all these
[50:41] other meetings. Could do you mind?
>> I'm out of here. [laughter]
[50:46] I just want to be know everything.
>> You don't have to tell him twice.
[50:50] [laughter]
[50:52] » I think he was looking forward to
>> see you later.
[50:57] » See you.
>> Um,
[51:02] » this shouldn't take long. So, if you
don't want to be
[51:06] » Don't have to leave. [laughter]
>> Never mind. All right. Um,
[51:10] » he's gone. Fix it. My understanding is
that um the applicant is requesting to
[51:18] uh withdraw without prejudice. So I just
want to be very careful um that we like
[51:25] you know that means that they could come
back at any time and we can't really you
[51:32] know take what they said at previous
meetings into account all that much. Um
[51:38] you know even if it's a very similar
thing. So let's just keep that in mind.
[51:43] Um you know try not to discuss it
discuss it in a quorum all that much
[51:47] [laughter]
um for you know transparency's sakes. U
[51:52] but with that being said um could I have
a motion to I guess grant or ratify
[51:58] their um request to withdraw the
application without prejudice.
[52:03] » I'll make that motion.
>> Do I have a second?
[52:05] » Second.
>> All those in favor I
[52:07] » chair votes I as well. Um, all right.
Administrator's report. We have a
[52:13] emergency certification for Sander uh
Dukshshire 375 Kendall Road. Um,
[52:19] » yeah. Did Dennis definitely leave? Do we
do we feel like he's gone? Did he
[52:24] actually is he out of the building or
can he be invited back in?
[52:28] » Oh, he's he's gone
that way.
[52:32] » Um, yeah. So, uh, the commission has
previously ratified this, uh, emergency
[52:37] certification, but the, uh, they
actually needed a little bit more time
[52:41] to to finish it. Um, so they didn't get
started. They didn't actually apply for
[52:45] their permits, um, until a little bit
later in the month. So, uh, I have been
[52:49] informed that everything is finished,
but they just had before the the
[52:53] expiration date, they'd requested, um,
an extension to the 31st just to, you
[52:58] know, two or three extra days to
actually finish uh, that that tie-in.
[53:02] So, my recommendation would be to um to
vote to grant that request. Um and I
[53:08] prepared a memo for you to sign that
just indicates why the extra time was
[53:12] needed.
>> All right. So, do we actually have to
[53:15] make a motion for extending the
emergency certification?
[53:21] » I I don't think there's a formal process
for it. And so, I would I would
[53:26] recommend just just doing it to cover
your bases.
[53:28] » All right. Then I will take a motion to
con to uh extend the emergency
[53:32] certification.
>> So moved.
[53:34] » Do I have a second?
>> Second.
[53:36] » All those in favor?
>> I
[53:38] » chair votes I as well. All right. So
before we adjourn um so I I just so
[53:45] the issue of pools and uh you know very
close to the wetlands. I think we should
[53:50] you know start to discuss what we would
like to see. We we
[53:57] you know we very rarely I don't think
we've ever said no to something like a
[54:03] pool somebody enjoying their backyard.
Um we just the the issue for pools are
[54:10] that there's a tremendous amount of
chlorinated or
[54:15] water with chemicals in it in it um that
could be going into the wetlands. We
[54:22] want to avoid that. So, um, we can kind
of start to come up with ideas. Maybe
[54:29] there's another town, uh, close by that
has something that, you know, allows
[54:36] them, you know, to build pools that
close to the wetland, but with other
[54:44] provisions of how that can be safely
done. So they can't just dump, you know,
[54:51] 13,000 gallons of water into the
wetlands. If that's the if if the com if
[54:56] the
>> I think we need to I agree we need to
[54:59] » a little bit of boilerplate language.
>> Yeah. and and I I don't think it should
[55:05] be, you know, by right, you know, you
just automatically get it, you know, but
[55:12] something that's a little bit more
guidelines on how we
[55:15] » like we should at least protect the 25
foot
[55:18] » zone, you know, at least don't build in
that. And I know it's a problem cuz
[55:22] there's houses that are
>> built so close to the wetland.
[55:25] » Yeah. But, you know, then if you want a
pool, you need to move because that we
[55:30] need to at least protect that 25.
>> I know
[55:33] » it's not like
>> if you have [clears throat] a pool that
[55:36] close to the wetlands, the water's going
to get in there. There's there's no
[55:39] one's going to be able to police that.
So, it
[55:41] » it's all a give and take. Like, you
know, I'm sure when we all bought our
[55:45] houses, there was good things about
where the location was and then there's
[55:51] other annoying things about where it is.
I have National Grid who can come and
[55:57] just clear cut my lawn anytime they want
to. But
[56:01] » save me from buying a lawnmower.
>> Yeah, exactly. There there are benefits
[56:04] that I don't have to do that. Um but so
like that might be one of the
[56:10] unfortunate things is like if you buy a
house right next to the wetlands, it's
[56:14] going to be really difficult for you to
have a pool. You know, maybe that means
[56:20] there's a jacuzzi there that, you know,
we're we're more comfortable with a
[56:25] small, you know, uh, pool or something.
And and maybe that's it. Like, you know,
[56:30] within the 50 foot zone, you can have a
pool within the 25 foot, you're really
[56:38] limited to a certain size pool or
something that whatever we feel
[56:42] comfortable.
>> Right. And it's And
[56:44] » yeah, I would say nothing in the 25.
>> You say nothing in the 20. No. And and
[56:48] if you are going to be right on that
cusp, if it it would have to be above
[56:52] ground and you would have to have like a
drywall so you could discharge, you
[56:56] know, we we got to we've got to protect
this cuz it's
[57:00] » Yeah.
>> You can't you can't police it.
[57:04] » Um
>> Yeah.
[57:07] » Yeah. I would just suggest the the
condition that I tried was, you know, an
[57:11] attempt to police it. I think it could
be workshopped, but basically I think
[57:15] there could be a way to have, you know,
if a determination is issued for a pool
[57:20] in the 25 to 50 foot zone, they have to,
you know, give some indication of of the
[57:25] maintenance and it could be a routine
reporting thing where I I don't have any
[57:30] intentions of of leaving anytime soon.
So, where, you know, could actually
[57:34] receive that information, store it, make
sure it's recorded. Um, it doesn't have
[57:38] to be exactly uh a pool, you know, a
professional pool company
[57:42] » with a, you know, that does come do, you
know, a cleanout and and has the the
[57:47] invoice. It could be um a written
statement from the the landowner
[57:51] describing what they did. Um but having
a you know an annual summary um just it
[57:59] could be a
>> or like you know another
[58:02] like you mentioned that it's would be
relying on neighbors to report their
[58:07] neighbors. That's always a tricky thing
like it's it's not fun to Yeah. Like but
[58:13] perhaps it's like you know one of the
special conditions or one of the not
[58:18] special conditions the automatic
condition is that like the conservation
[58:22] agent can go and inspect on a yearly
basis or something like that maybe you
[58:27] know by you know yearly or what whatever
it might be whatever we feel comfortable
[58:31] with um to you know
>> right traditionally you're going to deal
[58:35] with this winterizing.
>> Yeah just winterizing.
[58:39] » Yeah. Um,
>> but we could at least get a sense of
[58:42] like
>> I I agree. I I think it's
[58:44] » Hey, all of these trees are dying.
[laughter] Like clearly,
[58:47] » you know, nothing else in turns into a
check a checklist for the homeowner.
[58:50] » Yeah. Yep.
>> Yeah. Exactly.
[58:52] » You're going to have to pick your permit
up. Here's take this checklist because
[58:55] this is what you're going to get. You
know,
[58:57] » if you're within, you know, if you're
within so so far of the wetland, you
[59:02] know, a distance of the wetland, then
this is what you need to do.
[59:05] » Mhm. Yeah.
>> You know, boom, boom, boom. Down the
[59:08] line. and I can just look at the thing,
check it off and
[59:10] » Yeah.
>> But I agree with Linda, we got to draw
[59:12] the line at 25 ft. We just got to say
enough.
[59:16] » Yeah. Um and just for my own review, you
know, if the commission would entertain
[59:22] the topic of uh you know, in ground
pools versus above ground, um you know,
[59:26] and whether those should be viewed
differently, if they're both in the same
[59:29] footprint. Um in my mind, an above
ground pool is much less disturbance. Um
[59:35] » and usually temporary, too. Yeah, it
doesn't have to be a
[59:39] » once you sink that money into an
ingground
[59:41] » draw down an above ground pool less
volume and traditionally they're not
[59:45] 20,000 25,000 gallons you know if we're
looking at percentages you know it's a
[59:50] thousand you know uh um the previous man
there was he was pretending it was
[59:55] dimminimous it's like it's not it's not
it's a thousand gallons you're taking
[59:58] » yeah it's it's not nothing um you know
um
[1:00:03] » no I think we that's a great
Um
[1:00:08] » yeah you so like I mean we can start
coming up with like actual language. Um
[1:00:15] nothing like I I don't want to put
something on the agenda just yet but we
[1:00:21] like we can at least start thinking
about it and put it put something on the
[1:00:25] agenda in the future in the near future
uh once we have like maybe some wording
[1:00:31] uh done. Now, changing the bylaw would
require um you know, going to town
[1:00:36] meeting and stuff,
>> right? We have to get the article in.
[1:00:39] » Yeah. Yeah. So,
>> that's a that that's a process. This
[1:00:43] isn't going to happen overnight, but you
know,
[1:00:45] » uh I can take a look and see if it would
necessitate a bylaw change or if it
[1:00:49] could just be the regs cuz I know the
regs.
[1:00:51] » Oh, yeah.
>> You can update the regs with, you know,
[1:00:53] public public meeting, publicly noticed.
Um it's much easier. So I think if uh
[1:01:00] I have to get town council's perspective
on it, but as long as that all aligned
[1:01:04] um
>> or you know if they think that it could
[1:01:06] be a separate policy document that
>> we want to we we want to do it
[1:01:09] correctly.
>> Yeah.
[1:01:10] » We want to be able to enforce it.
>> Um all right. So and then so battery
[1:01:16] storage. Um this is the other thing. um
like
[1:01:22] I I guess I want to be careful because I
think you know we can't go above and
[1:01:28] beyond what the state allows or doesn't
allow or I this is where it gets
[1:01:36] confusing for me personally is that it's
like the state says you can do one thing
[1:01:41] sometimes you can be more strict other
times
[1:01:45] depending on how they write it we can be
less strict I believe. Um well, reading
[1:01:51] reading the one of the towns that was
dealing with this, they said that they
[1:01:56] were changing
their their town policy to address a
[1:02:03] newer threat to the environment. And
that fire that was uh I saw the article
[1:02:09] that was passed around the fire that uh
now the now the groundwater is
[1:02:14] contaminated from a lithium battery
burning actually burning. All right.
[1:02:18] » Now, that's a concern.
>> Yeah.
[1:02:20] » Um and especially since we were talking
about something and it's not over that
[1:02:24] was right next to the Great Swamp.
>> Mhm.
[1:02:27] » Um I think it's something we need to
we need to look at.
[1:02:31] » Yeah. I just want to be careful because
like, you know,
[1:02:36] » it's got nothing to do to me. It's
something that has brought
[1:02:41] a new threat to us and we're not taking
it. It just it was in front of us.
[1:02:46] » No. No. I and I get that. I just I want
to be very careful when crafting a law
[1:02:52] because we can't I think the the risk we
take is if we just said, you know,
[1:03:00] lithium ion batteries are not allowed
within 100 ft of the uh buffer zone or
[1:03:07] whatever it is,
>> right? You know what? I don't think
[1:03:09] we're going to do a blanket statement,
>> but I'm just saying that might mean that
[1:03:13] anybody who owns an electric car would
not be able to own their electric car if
[1:03:19] they're in, you know, the uh, you know,
if they're on the buffer zone.
[1:03:24] Obviously, I I don't think anybody's
intention is to say you can't, you know,
[1:03:28] own a certain type of car. I don't think
the, you know, state would allow us to
[1:03:33] draft and adopt a bylaw saying as such.
Right. So like
[1:03:37] » I think though reading articles about
you know cuz it is a new up and coming
[1:03:42] thing other towns were addressing it.
We've already had a we've already had a
[1:03:47] um you know a failure of it and they and
they detected the chemicals in there in
[1:03:54] the groundwater. So
>> we need to look at that. You know um
[1:03:58] don't forget this project that came
before us had the state 100 was it 112
[1:04:04] exemptions.
so they could build it.
[1:04:07] » It was a a massive amount of
>> And
[1:04:11] » could we but could we put in something
like we need to have full containment in
[1:04:17] case of emergency if you're a battery
plant of this size cuz that that was a
[1:04:22] big issue. There was no containment if
there's a fire and it goes on for 8 days
[1:04:26] and
>> you know burns for 8 days.
[1:04:28] » I think just I do I I think it needs to
be looked at.
[1:04:32] » Yeah. And you know, I don't want to do
blanket statements, but I think we need
[1:04:35] to see what are other people doing.
>> Yeah. Exactly. I think
[1:04:38] » and let's let's see go from there. You
know, we don't need to say boom boom
[1:04:42] boom, but other people are addressing
it.
[1:04:44] » Yeah. And we don't need to reinvent the
wheel. We can look at other towns and
[1:04:49] seeing what they're doing. Uh
>> cuz I don't know what's reasonable at
[1:04:53] this point. like you know um if there's
a
[1:04:59] a limit of like you know for if it's one
or two we take that risk but if it's
[1:05:06] over a certain number we say we really
got to you know do some research on what
[1:05:12] is the adequate you know way to contain
something like this. Um, [snorts] and
[1:05:17] then, you know, compare that to what the
state would uh, you know, allow us to
[1:05:22] actually permit and stuff.
>> I agree [clears throat] with Steve. I
[1:05:26] think we just need, you know, find out
what other people are doing first.
[1:05:29] » Yeah.
>> And then start to see what's
[1:05:32] » what makes sense.
>> Yeah. Exactly.
[1:05:35] » Yeah. We don't want to do a hard line,
but we also want to see because I read
[1:05:39] two articles that towns were addressing
this headon. M
[1:05:43] » they're conservation people.
>> They're not not just
[1:05:46] » No, they were they were like, "Okay,
this this is
[1:05:49] » we're seeing a trend."
>> Mhm.
[1:05:51] » Um and I'm sure we had some visibility
in that.
[1:05:54] » Yeah. Um All right. So, you know, again,
I don't think we can come to any, you
[1:06:01] know, I don't want to rewrite the law
right now. [laughter] Um, but we can,
[1:06:05] you [clears throat] know, think about
this and, um, you know, do some research
[1:06:09] on other towns, see what they're doing,
and and then come back and either maybe
[1:06:13] it's a regulation um, um, update, maybe
it's a a bylaw update, whatever it is.
[1:06:19] Uh, we can just be prepared the next
time something like this happens. And,
[1:06:24] you know, we're going to have a little
bit more force behind,
[1:06:27] » right? I think we would be remiss in our
duties if we didn't look into it.
[1:06:32] » All right. With that, if there's no
further discussion, I will entertain a
[1:06:36] motion to adjurnn.
>> Do I have a second?
[1:06:39] » Second.
>> All those in favor. Chair
[1:06:41] » votes I as well.