Conservation Commission Meeting - January 27, 2026

I am calling to order the Dartmouth Conservation Commission meeting uh for Tuesday, January 27, 2026.

We're holding this meeting remotely as a result of Governor Healey signing on March 28, 2025, a further extension of the hybrid remote meeting option for municipalities.

And she extended that option until June 30 2027.

The meetings are publicly accessible and there is a raise your hand feature, a chat as well as a make a motion, wave your hand, and we'll recognize you. Um this meeting is uh called as and as a result of having been duly noticed by both state and local bylaws. So we have that u both on our website town hall.

Uh I will tell you that this evening an affirmative vote will require four commissioners. So four out of seven for our affirmative vote. Um, we have administrative items to begin with and the first is the approval of December 9, 2025 minutes. May I have a motion to that effect, please?

So moved. Second.

We have a seconded motion. Roll call vote. Megan, yes.

Liz, yes.

Richard, yes.

Donald, yes.

Nat, yes. James, yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously. Our second administrative item is the approval of the field trip reports for January 13, 2026. May I please have a motion to that effect?

So moved.

Second.

Second.

We have a seconded motion on the floor.

Roll call vote. Megan, yes.

Nat, yes.

Liz, yes. James, yes.

Donald, yes.

And Richard, yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

We don't have any field trip reports for this evening's meeting, but we do have public hearings. And uh there are two um that I I guess one in particular. Do we have a file number for number four, Eduardo?

Uh, no file number has been received um as of 4:30 uh uh this afternoon and I just checked a little bit just a little bit ago and I haven't got anything in terms of file number for that since. So, okay. And you'll notice we also have a uh public hearing with a request to withdraw and I believe we have two more public hearings with requests for continuances. Um but we'll get to those

in a minute, but I wanted to give everybody a preview. So first public hearing is a continued public hearing DP file 15-2805 NOI 2539.

It's on the notice of intent from the Dartmouth Natural Resources Trust, the NRT care of David M. Devign for site improvements that include uh installation on-site gravel road access with signage, parking areas and storm water controls, improve sight lines along Flag Swamp Road, and to remove a steel catwalk, two pump houses, and a wooden pier. These activities will occur on or within an inland bank, land underwater,

u bordering land subject to flooding, riverfront area, and the 100 ft buffer zone to a bordering vegetated wetland.

Uh the regulations involved are 310 CMR 10.02, 2 10.54 through 10.58 and section 360-2 of the town of Dartmouth bylaw. The land is described as map 79, lot 34-1. It's otherwise known as 293 Flag Swamp Road. I'll entertain a motion to wave the reading.

So move.

Second.

We have a motion on the floor and that motion uh will be by roll call vote. Uh, Richard, yes.

Megan, yes.

Nat, yes. Liz, yes.

James, yes.

Donald, against never a good position.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously. I see Mr. Wildman has his hand raised, but um I was just going to ask if there's anyone here this evening who wants to speak on behalf of the applicant, and I suspect it'll be Mr.

Wildman.

That's right, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much. Happy to be here.

I'm embarrassed to be here. It's been about two months since we first opened this hearing and uh I did not think it would take this long. So, I'm grateful to the commission for their patience.

Um, you know, nothing has changed really substantially despite this long time and the numerous back and forth between our consultant and with the town engineer uh to meet the requirements uh for storm water management that the town expected for this. We had initially filed and prepared our analysis based on a redevelopment project given the extensive impacts to the site. uh it was the feeling of the engineering

department that this rather was more appropriately considered a new development and therefore met more stringent standards. So I'm pleased to say that with the submitt that Mr. Divin made to the commission uh prior to the last hearing uh we've been able to meet those standards. My understanding is that engineering has signed off through the portal. Um please correct me if that is not the case.

I'm not aware of it. So, Eduardo, has the has uh DPW engineering signed off on the storm water?

Yes. Um Mr. Dart um over in engineering has has has signed off on uh on 293 flies on road.

Okay. So, you are correct.

That's great.

You are correct. you know, with respect to the um regulations that the conservation commission is charged with upholding, um there have been no real substantive changes in terms of temporary or permanent impacts to the resource areas. Um these are all within the work area that was proposed before.

We're staying out of wetland resource areas uh for the most part with the exception of riverfront area and land subject to flooding in in a in a small area as well. So, um, rather than take the commission's time to rehash the presentation I gave back on November 5th, um, I'm happy to take questions or respond to any concerns that the commission may have.

I appreciate that. Um, Eduardo, before we entertain any questions, I would like to hear staff's comments on this particular proposal.

Um, we don't have too many much too much uh, comments. based off this uh project.

I mean um talking with uh Mark, we're both very much in support of the project in total.

Um given that um we would recommend a standard order of conditions per the plan dated January 8th, 2026 with the modification of special condition number 41 to read any overwater fork shall require appropriate containment measures. For example, a floating boom with a weighted silk curtain to be deployed during construction activity to pres prevent siltation in aquatic environments.

Thank you very much. Uh does any commissioner have any question to uh pose either to um Mr. Wildman or to Eduardo?

I don't see any. Is there anyone in the audience that wants to be heard on this particular application?

Again, I don't see anyone. So, at this juncture, I will entertain a motion to close the public hearing.

So moved.

Second. We have a seconded motion on the floor. Roll call vote. Richard, yes.

Megan, yes.

Nat, yes.

Donald, yes.

James, yes.

Liz, yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

Uh what we have is a recommendation um as well as the presentations plural uh by the applicant over the previous public hearings and tonight for the issuance of a standard order of conditions in accordance with the plan uh dated January 8, 2026 with the special condition number 41 as read into the record by Eduardo Forz. I have a motion on that recommendation.

So moved.

Second.

Second.

We have a seconded motion on the floor.

Roll call vote.

That uh yes. Before I vote, just for the record, I am both a member and a volunteer, a member of DNRT and a volunteer member of its finance committee. I have no authority over day-to-day operations. I have no involvement with this specific project and I have no financial interest in DNRT itself. Given that I vote yes on this particular issue.

Thank you. Megan, yes.

Richard, yes.

Liz, yes.

James, yes.

Donald, uh, same disclosure. I'm a member of DNRT. Had no financial interest in the project. And with that disclosure, I vote yes.

And my vote is yes as well. That motion passes unanimously. Uh, Nick, good luck on the project. I think it's a good one.

Thanks very much. And thank you again for all your patience on this.

Not a problem.

Our second public hearing is a continued public hearing on DP D file 15-2808 uh NOI 25-41 on the notice of intent from 600 Pamska land trust care of David M. Dignon to construct a residential pier and per perform improvements to the existing cart path within land subject to coastal storm flowage. Land under the ocean, land containing shellfish, the 100 ft buffer zone to a salt marsh, and

land within a 200 ft riverfront area.

The regulations are 310 CMR, 10.02, 10.04 10.25 25 10.32 10.34 and section 360-2 of the town of Dartmouth bylaws. The land is described as map 19, lot 20_2, otherwise known as 600 Patmpska Road. I entertain a motion to wave the reading.

So moved.

Second.

Second motion. We have a seconded motion. Roll call vote. Donald, yes.

James, yes. Liz, yes.

Thank you. Nat, yes. Megan, yes.

Richard, yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

Um, I know there was an email request that was submitted uh I believe this afternoon or this morning from Mr. Devign requesting that we continue this until I believe our second meeting in February. And the reason being that due to a host of issues including the weather, Harbormaster was unable to go to site and do what um we thought would be appropriate, namely to uh look at the proposal that was

being discussed. And I believe that Mr.

Dignon's u client and he uh agreed that given those circumstances uh continuing this evening's meeting might be the best for all parties. Um so what was the exact date that they wanted to do that for Eduardo?

Uh it was February 24th.

Thank you.

They wanted to extend it to.

So uh that that is the request. Um obviously it's within our prerogative to either grant or deny the request. Uh personally I think given the circumstances and the fact that this is an accommodation so that the harbor master can actually review physically on the ground what's being proposed and then give us a recommendation which we said we needed. Um this is an appropriate request.

Does any uh commissioner have any questions?

All right. Is there anyone in the audience that's here this evening just for this matter and wants to be heard tonight?

Uh Mr. Chairman, if I may.

Sure, you may.

Um having spoken with uh Dave Dignon earlier today, I believe he is currently um attending a different uh meeting for a different project at this current moment. So, he may not uh be joining us until later this afternoon or this evening.

I understand that. Um given the fact that we're not likely, we're going to vote on this, but we're not going to have a presentation this evening, I don't have a problem moving forward without Mr. Dignon's presence. He did request in writing the um continuence and I think the reason for it is legitimate and actually is beneficial to the town so we can actually have our harbor master give us a report that's meaningful.

So um I appreciate you bringing that up though Eduardo. So, uh, at this juncture, um, I will entertain a motion, uh, to continue this matter until our February 24, 2026 public meeting at 700 p.m.

So, a second. We have a seconded motion.

Roll call vote. Richard, yes.

Liz, yes.

James, yes.

Megan, yes.

Donald, yes.

That yes.

And my vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

Um, we have our third public hearing, uh, D file 15-2807, NOI25-38.

It's on the notice of intent from Cedarside Family Nominee Trust Cara Richard Ray to armor the riverbank honor within an inland bank bordering land subject to flooding and riverfront area.

The regulations involved are 310 CMR 10.02 10.57 10.58 and section 360-2 of the town of Dartmouth bylaw. The land is described as map 14 lot 8. otherwise known as 536 Pamska Road. May I have a motion to wave the reading?

So moved.

Second.

We have a seconded motion on the floor.

Roll call vote. Donald, yes.

James, yes.

Liz, yes.

Nat, yes.

Megan, yes.

Richard, yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously. Um the commission has received a request from the applicant through its engineer to uh withdraw this matter without prejudice. Um Eduardo, I don't know if you want to expound on that or not. You don't have to.

Um, I I suppose the only thing I'll I can say really about this one is uh I believe there were some issues with uh natural heritage and uh terrapens uh on this particular property um as well as that we had there were some issues with the project in general as well.

I don't see anyone. So, at this point, um, commissioners, unless there's any questions or concerns, I would entertain a motion to allow, uh, DP file number 15-2807 to be withdrawn without prejudice.

So, moved.

Second.

Second.

Seconded motion on the floor. Roll call vote. Nat, yes.

Megan, yes.

Donald, yes.

James, yes. Liz, yes.

Richard, yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

Our fourth public hearing does not have a file number. So even if the applicant wishes to present it tonight, we cannot close.

Okay. It is uh NOI 26-1. It's on the notice of intent from Nicholas Police for approval to construct an attached garage addition with associated grading within the 100 ft buffer zone to an inland bank and within bordering land subject to flooding. The regulations are 310 CMR 10.02 10.54 10.57 and section 360-2 of the town of Dartmouth bylaws. The land is described as map 186 lots 3

underscore 1 and 4. It's otherwise known as 46 Lakeside Avenue. I entertain motion to wave the reading. Please move.

Second, please.

We have a second.

We have a second. Roll call vote.

James, yes.

Richard, yes. Donald, yes.

Megan, yes.

Liz, yes.

That yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously. Is there someone here this evening that wishes to present this matter on behalf of the applicant?

I don't I'm not seeing anybody.

Um, Eduardo, do you know if they knew that they didn't have a file number, we wouldn't be able to close the public hearing?

Yes, I received an email uh from the engineer last minute um this afternoon um right around 4:30 um explaining that they would like to request a continuance until February 10th uh given that they do not have a file number from D.

Very good. Does any commissioner have any uh questions about that request?

Is there anyone in the audience that wants to be heard on this matter this evening?

I don't see any uh questions from the commissioners, nor do I see anyone in the audience wishing to be heard. So, I will entertain at the request of the applicant a motion to continue this public hearing. Um, it's NOI26-1 uh on behalf of Nicholas Place uh 46 Lakeside Avenue to continue this until our February uh 18. Is that correct, Eduardo?

10th uh I believe is the 10th.

Oh, 10th. I'm sorry. February 10, 2026 public hearing at 7 PM.

Moved.

Second. Thank you.

We have a seconded motion on the floor.

Roll call vote. Richard, yes.

Liz, yes.

James, yes.

Donald, yes.

Megan, yes.

Nat, yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously. That brings us to our fifth and final public hearing. It's on D file 15-2812, NOI26-2.

It's on the after the fact notice of intent from Steven uh Gandio. And I'm sorry, I'm probably mangling your name and I apologize. U for approval for restoration project associated with a previously unauthorized disturbance within the 100 ft buffer zone. uh to a bordering vegetated wetland. The regulations are 310 CMR 10.55 and section 360-2 of the town of Dartmouth bylaw. The land is on

the parcels described as map 165 lot 16 and 17 and map 174 lot 80 is otherwise known as 566 State Road. I'll entertain a motion to wave the reading. So moved.

Second.

We have a seconded motion on the floor.

Roll call vote.

Megan, yes.

Nat, yes.

Liz, yes.

James, yes.

Richard, yes.

Donald, yes.

My name my vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

All righty. Is there someone here this evening on behalf of the applicant?

Um, Eduardo, has the applicant requested a continuence on this matter?

Uh, yes. So, they requested a continuence uh to kind of hopefully answer some of the questions we raised to them. um in regards to both the the 2018 wetland line by Evinus and the current wetland line uh which seems to have changed uh and given the snow conditions uh out there currently uh having spoken to Christopher Vanderberg who is taking over this uh project he mentioned it could take a couple of

weeks to kind of get the information that we were looking for. In terms of a continuence, I he did not mention a particular date.

Uh he just requested a a continuence until the next meeting in February. So I suppose February 10th, correct?

February 10th, correct?

Okay. If he thinks it might take him a couple of weeks to do it, that'll be putting it pretty close. but I'm willing to hold them to it. So, um, does any commissioners have any questions on this?

Is there anyone in the audience that wants to be heard on this matter tonight?

Yes, Mr. Chairman, I would like to speak to this.

Um, I think the commission needs to be aware of a couple of things. this particular applicant, this is the second violation that they have committed in wetlands pertaining to their operation, the Dartmouth collision uh business on State Road.

This notice of intent, this after the fact notice of intent was in my mind hastily put together. It was using old information that did not was not consistent with older information that was a line of record that this particular commission voted on several years ago during the previous enforcement activity.

So it was deficient there. uh the consultant did not present justifiable information, justifiable information to argue that the wetland line changed. I'm not saying it changed or it didn't change, but they did not produce the data that they should have at the time. And I think that the use of that particular delineation was probably a little faulty on the applicant's part.

The second issue is that uh the enforcement order required restoration and basically all they said was yeah we're going to restore it. They didn't tell us how. They didn't tell us with what. They didn't give us any kind of species determination. They didn't give us any density. They basically just kind of filled in the blanks uh very generically. Uh I think the commission because this is a second violation needs

to take that into consideration. Uh it is my assessment that this applicant does not really hold wetlands in very much regard. Uh and they have a pending notice of intent for an expansion project coming up later. We have seen preliminary plans that would be within our jurisdiction even under the new line as presented. Um I don't want to tell you what to do.

Obviously, the commission needs to continue this, but I think my suggestion would be that there is some urgency in indicating to the applicant and their agents that this is an enforcement order response. This is not just a project out there. This is a violation of wetland law and it is a second violation by the same applicant.

So, I just wanted to bring that to the commission's attention as information to use as you proceed further.

Thank you, Mark. Um, does any commissioner have any questions?

Is there anyone in the audience this evening that's uh wants to speak on this matter tonight?

I don't see anybody. Uh, commissioners, I would entertain a motion to continue this public hearing until February 10, 2026 at 700 p.m. with the stipulation that due to the fact this is a second violation of the wetlands protection laws in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in the town of Dartmouth, there will be no further continuation That's it. So move.

So move. Second.

We have a seconded motion on the floor.

Roll call vote. James, yes.

Donald, yes.

Liz, yes.

Nat, yes.

Megan, yes.

Richard, yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

That concludes our public hearings. We do have some items for discussion.

Eduardo, the floor is yours.

Um, yes. So, the only item uh I have for discussion is uh 271 State Road. Uh we have an enforcement order against them uh currently that the commission would need to vote on. Uh of course uh essentially there's been some unauthorized trenching uh for both electrical work and for um vacuums over at the car wash over there.

U free car wash.

Free car wash. Right.

Um, and there's been some minor uh minor I suppose cutting uh within the um within the riverfront and the uh the the bank uh over on the east side of the lot. Um and so yeah, that's currently where we're standing on that Okay. And so you're looking for the commissioners this evening to authorize the issuance of an enforcement order at 271 State Road. Is that correct?

Correct.

So, commissioners, uh, we'll entertain a motion for the issuance.

Could I could I just make a quick comment here? Uh I don't know if uh you folks read the latest edition of Dartmouth Week, but that car wash has been completely shut down by the town for innumerable violations of various bylaws, DPW and the like. Uh so that project has really been clamped down on by a number of departments and I certainly think it's fitting that this commission issue an enforcement order u

based on our jurisdiction also.

Thank you Mark.

And Mr. Chairman, I think the enforcement order definitely uh should stress and emphasize a complete cease and desist of any work down there.

Yeah, I I haven't seen any work going on in a while. They they looked like they were ready to start and they were doing work. And the only reason I stressed the free car washes because there are other car washes on Route Six in Dartmouth.

And I just didn't want folks in the audience who may have just heard to assume it was the other guys. Okay? I just want to be sure so that there's no um confusion there.

Um and by the way, I have no interest in either car wash, so I really don't care, but I know we have more than one on Route 6. That's why I made mention of the name. Um does any other commissioner have any comments they want to add before we seek a vote on this?

I don't see any. So, at this juncture, I would entertain a motion to authorize the issuance of an enforcement order at 271 State Road. Um, and to emphasize in that enforcement order, cease and desist immediately any activities on site until appropriate approvals have been granted.

So moved.

Second.

Have a seconded motion on the floor.

Roll call vote. James. Yes, Richard.

Yes, Donald.

Yes, Megan.

Yes, that.

Yes, Liz.

Yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

Um, I have nothing further to add. I do note that I think all of us got a an email from Mark about the progress that's being made on the regulations between he and Brian and I'm thrilled to see that uh and look forward to um having that to review in our February meetings.

Um if I could add just to that uh it was a very good read. I was very surprised. I was anticipating a much more difficult Zoom session. Uh but uh Brian reformatted it. It reads very well. It has included everything that we have discussed in the past. It hasn't really radically changed things except for the uh wetland A1 process. I won't get into that discussion right now. Mike and I

have spoken about it and it's actually probably a very prudent change that's being made and it can be easily accomplished and we can handle that in when we discuss the regulations and I fully anticipate that you will have a copy in hand to review and comment on prior to the February 10th uh meeting and we will have that discussion at that time.

Good job and kudos to both you and Brian for bringing this I think very important project close to a conclusion at this point. We can we'll conclude our part of it and then it's up to uh the powers that be to approve it.

But I'm glad to know that we're finally seeing the light at the end of the tunnel and it's not an oncoming train.

Um so that's good news. I have nothing further. Does any commissioner have anything they wish to have discussed this evening?

No. But thank you, Mark, for your efforts.

Uh, yes. Very much so.

So I I would entertain at this juncture a motion to adjurnn.

So moved. Second.

Second.

Seconded motion on the floor. Roll call vote. Liz, yes. Nat, yes.

Megan, yes.

Richard, yes.

James, yes.

Donald, yes.

My vote is yes. The meeting is adjourned. Thank you everyone. I appreciate your attendance this evening.

And uh also appreciate again echoing Mark, you and Brian did ymanl like work and I appreciate it very much. Eduardo, great meeting. You conducted the meeting well. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. All right. Bye. Bye.

Thanks. Good night.

Take care.

Stay warm everyone.