Conservation Commission Meeting - July 7, 2026

7 o'clock and we do have a quorum. So, I am going to call to order the Tuesday, July 7, 2026 meeting of the Dartmouth Conservation Commission.

This evening's meeting is being held remotely because on March 28, 2025, Governor Healey signed an ex exension for hybrid remote meeting options to municipalities and she allowed that extension to continue until June 30, 2027.

Our meetings are open and accessible to the public and there is a feature whereby public uh input can be presented and that's either going to be the wave your hand feature, the chat feature or if all else fails make some kind of motion and we'll recognize you.

Otherwise, I would ask that you keep your um microphone muted so we don't have any interruptions with presentations.

I will also indicate that this meeting was duly posted in accordance with town and state law and published for the applicable public hearings um that have not been continued in the um paper having general circulation in Dartmouth.

So, we met all of the requirements.

Excuse me.

I'm also going to say if anybody wants to share a screen, just let me know and I will let DCTV know whether that's acceptable.

Our first items are administrative. The first is to approve the April 26, 2026 minutes. Could I have a motion to that effect, please?

So moved. So moved. Second.

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

Megan, yes.

James, yes.

Donald, yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

The second administrative item is to uh have the staff provide us with updates.

And I guess Jennifer, you can start that. and Mark uh Mark, excuse me, Eduardo, if you have any questions uh or comments that you want to add to it, please do so.

Um I don't really have much in the way of updates for this meeting. Um basically, we have some water quality uh sampling that Eduardo and I will be participating in again this year. Um I know the department participated last year. um and seems like a a great project to be involved in cooperatively with the board of health. Um and then um the water quality committee should be starting up uh next week is the first

meeting. We'll see how that goes. It's a pretty big group. Um but I think that's really all I have at this point. Uh we we one other item, sorry. We did get the ad posted for the part-time admin position that was approved at um this year's town meeting. Um, so we're hoping we get some applicants for that and I will keep you all posted. Hopefully, um, we can have an update on an interview

schedule uh for the next meeting.

Terrific. Anything uh to add, Eduardo?

Uh, nothing to add at this uh at this juncture.

Very good. Well, we're going to move on to our wetland site inspections and determinations.

um used to be called our field trip reports. Okay, I guess um you'll notice the commissioners I hope you'll notice there's a new format in the uh agenda and Jennifer thought of this brought it to my attention. I think it makes the agenda uh read a little bit better specifically everything is in in a more organized fashion and I think it also helps us to stay on point. So, with that being said, um we have

four uh wetland uh site inspections and we we probably should just do do the vote, one for each one. So, the first I'd like to hear about is 333 Rakadundi.

Eduardo is going to present uh for the wetland site inspections.

Thank you, Eduardo. The floor is yours.

Um 3:30 Rockco Dundee. Uh staff uh went and did a site inspection over at that property. Uh there didn't appear to be any areas under conservation jurisdiction, uh which includes flood zone, uh buffer zone from abuing properties, um wetlands. Uh so we're recommending the commission um to uh issue uh no wetlands um on that parcel.

Okay.

I'm going to now ask if any commissioner has a question on that. 333 Rockadundi.

Not to me.

I don't see anyone else. So, I entertain a motion to approve staff's recommendation regarding 333 Rakadundi. Uh essentially indicating that nothing that is being proposed is within the jurisdiction of the conservation commission.

So moved.

Second. Thank you.

Have a seconded motion on the floor.

Roll call vote. Um Donald, yes.

James, yes.

Megan, yes.

Richard, yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

The second um wetland site inspection is for 30 or sorry, 22 South Wind. Eduardo, your uh observations and recommendation, please.

Um, I'd like to let's see. I'd like to share my screen uh briefly if possible.

Yes, DCTV, please let Eduardo share his screen.

Yes, Eduardo, you should have co-host permissions. Just let me know if it's not working for any reason.

Got it. Thanks.

Uh, okay. See here.

Okay. Can everyone see that?

Yes, I can. Thank you.

Okay. Um, so 22 South Windway, uh, so staff went out and did a sight inspection for, uh, this part of property over here. Uh, we discovered that, uh, there appears to be some storm water, um, pipes, uh, that daylight, uh, right in this area, uh, and create sort of an intermittent channel. uh and then come back in and come back into the pipe right around here and very likely um

I believe go off in one of these directions. I forget which at the moment. Um uh but so staff flagged uh that intermittent channel that kind of runs along here. I don't know if you can see that mouse or not. Whoops. Hold on one sec here.

Nope. We just lost the map that you were Yep. Okay, so the intermittent channel um runs right around here across here. Uh so we place three wetland flags uh labeled concom 1 through concom 3 uh just indicating the edge of that intermittent channel that runs through the back of 22 southwind. Uh the property owner is looking to do some perk tests which uh two perk tests, one over here and then

another one right around here. Uh so the edge of that um intermittent channel appears to be it's 100 foot buffer zone appears to kind of go from this point and then down to this point. So, those perk tests appear to be outside that 100 foot buffer zone. Um, at least according to our our measurements, that's that'll obviously have to be field verified. Um, so we're recommending the commission to

um approve uh that uh wetland line.

Okay.

And you were on site when, Eduardo?

Uh, it was July 6th.

Okay.

Does any commissioner have any questions?

Um, don't see any. I'll entertain a motion um to accept staff's recommendation regarding 22 South Wind Way and to approve uh the wetlands flags that were installed uh by staff during the July 6, 2026 site inspection.

So move second.

Second.

Got a seconded motion on the floor. Roll call vote. Richard, yes.

Megan, yes.

James, yes.

Donald, yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

Okay, Eduard, if we can stop the screen sharing, that'd be good.

Oh. Uh, yep. Sorry.

Okay.

Okay.

Thank you. So, now we're moving on to uh zero Little River Road. Um, and that's uh for a perk test, correct?

Correct. Yep.

Okay. If you want to give us your observations and staff's recommendation regarding zero little river road.

Um, so I'm just going to share another screen here just to get CCTV just uh Eduardo can share his screen without a problem.

Okay. So, uh, Zero Little River Road encompasses, it's sits right between 49 and 35. So, it's this parcel right here in between that has that very odd shape to it. Um, and so there weren't any wetlands on the property. However, uh, based off of just a visual inspection, it appears that there are wetlands over here in the back of Two Beach Rose Lane.

Uh and so our memo indicates that uh the buffer zone of the wetlands back here extend to approximately where my arrow is downwards. Uh if you can all see that or not.

Um so that 100 foot buffer zone appears to extend right about here. Um, and other notes uh we made uh while on site, there are there's a derelict car uh that's right around here in the right along the tree line. Uh looks like it's been there for quite a while. Um, other notes we wanted to just mention in the memo as well, uh, that there appear to be other

car parts here and a one or two, uh, rusted barrels that not sure what was in there at one point, but uh, we did make a note that, um, those items have the potential to leech um, chemicals or fluids into the surrounding soil or and groundwater potentially. contaminating it. So, that's something uh that we put into the memo. But in terms of actual wetlands, uh just that little portion back here of

buffer zone in the back there. Um so, uh we're recommending the commission um to approve that uh that well-in buffer.

Has it been did Did you say you flagged it or just observed it?

Just observed it because it sits on a uh a different uh a different property.

Okay. So, um as to the applicant, I guess is the applicant's proposed project something that's within the jurisdiction of conservation commission or not? I want to be clear on that.

Uh so currently they're they're proposing to do some perk tests which are the pro those perk tests are going to be much further down here uh where the bottom two houses are. Uh so they're very far away from uh any conservation uh jurisdiction.

Okay. And when was the site visit for this one?

Uh July 1st, 2016 uh 2026.

Does any other commissioner have a question?

areas and some materials with in those buffer zone areas that have the potential for harming the wetlands.

I know that was a mouthful. Does anybody have So moved.

Okay.

Second.

So, and I see Natt, you're on. Did you hear any of this presentation? I heard I heard 90% of it. Yes.

You feel like you want to vote on it?

It's probably best I don't.

Okay. So, we have a seconded motion on the floor. We'll do a roll call vote.

Richard, yes.

Megan, yes.

James, yes.

Donald, yes.

And my vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

Uh we're now going to uh the wetland site inspection for 453 Smith Neck Road. Eduardo, would you give us your observations and recommendations and also the date of the inspection?

Uh so staff uh inspected this parcel on July 1st, 2026.

Uh and it is our opinion that um that there don't there there doesn't appear to be any wetlands or areas of under uh conservation jurisdiction on this uh parcel.

So, uh we're recommending the commission to um to issue a no no wetlands uh negative determination.

Yes.

Okay.

Does any commissioner have any questions?

Okay. Commissioners, I'll entertain a motion uh to accept staff's recommendation and based on staff's uh site visit of 453 Smith Neck Road on July 1, 2026 that a negative determination for the proposed uh septic repair be issued.

So move second.

Second.

We have a seconded motion on the floor.

Roll call vote. Natt, yes.

Yes.

James, yes.

Megan, yes.

Richard, yes.

And my vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

We now have a RDA.

And this is an RDA for 26-03. Otherwise, uh, properties zero Smith Neck Road and zero Matters Lane. Um, that's town map 21, 20, 95, lots 155, and 5.1, respectively.

Um, the applicant is Dartmouth Natural Resources Trust, Inc., I'm sorry, the owner is Dartmouth Natural Resources Trust, Inc. The applicant is Michelle Lebris um on behalf of the School for Marine Science and Technology UMass Dartmouth. And the project is the research studies and field investigation focused on uh cord grass spartina.

Okay, I give up on this. I'm not going to even try to say it. transplantation and recovery on mud flats within coastal salt marches experiencing vegetation loss. Um, who wants to present that uh stamp recommendation?

Um well we have the applicant on so um I'd like to give her the opportunity to go through um the proposal and then um I will give recommendations after that.

Okay. And I think for everyone's edification this was something that we knew was coming even though we did approve the be commencement of the project. So yes on behalf of the applicant please someone.

Hello. Um yes, this is Micheline Lee. Um thank you for giving me this opportunity. So yes, the uh transplants did uh start following the last conservation commission meeting. Um we had proposed six transexs of this smooth cord grass spartina alternative flora.

The purpose is to determine whether or not this 29 acre mud flat can be reveated. So we're asking uh submitting this request for determination of applicability umly for this uh cord grass in these these couple parcels owned by the Dart Dartmouth Natural Resources Trust.

Um the uh the proposed project right now um would continue through this year's marsh grass growing season. um with kind of a culmination of monitoring um this you know fall October, November um with with the overall goal of just seeing what what survives, what grows, what flowers etc.

Very good. Very well. Uh does staff have any comments regarding the proposal?

Yeah, I just would expand a little bit upon like what you mentioned earlier, Mike. Um that um there was a prior determination of approval issued for this same site for a very similar project. It's just that the alignment of the transexs and um some of the um like the the planting uh alignment has changed. Uh and so the feeling was from the commission that the determination was really specific the

last time around even though it's still valid and that a new RDA should be submitted and a new approval issued. Um so this is kind of checking that box.

Um, so we have all the information uh as far as what that realignment will look like and um my recommendation would be that this should be a a positive 2B which is basically saying that we're not confirming the wetland boundaries for this project um because they're doing work um or their research study and field investigations in the resource area itself in the salt marsh. Um and

then uh so that's what the positive 2B would uh qualify basically that we're not determining the boundaries of those resource areas. Um and then a negative two which is that the work um requested is in an area subject to jurisdiction under the act but it will not remove fill dredge or alter. Um and then a negative six um which is that it's not subject to additional review or approval

um through an NOI process with the commission. So it's covers both the state jurisdiction and the local jurisdiction.

Very good. Thank you. Does any commissioner have any questions?

Okay. I don't see any. And what I'm going to do is I'm going to take all three of these up in one motion. Okay?

So, uh, commissioners, bear with me, but I'm going to, uh, entertain a motion to issue a positive 2B, a negative -2 and a negative 6 on the RDA 26-3 for zero Smith Neck Road and zero Matters Lane. uh as pres as filed with the commission and as presented this evening.

We have a motion moved.

Second.

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

Donald, yes.

Megan, yes.

Natt, uh before I vote, just as I've disclosed in the past, I am a both a member of DNRT as well as a volunteer member of its finance committee. I have no financial interest in DNRT or this project, nor do I have any decision-m associated with the pursuit of this project. Therefore, I think it's still appropriate for me to vote and I vote yes.

Thank you, James.

Yes.

My vote is yes. That passes unanimously.

Good luck with your research. Sounds like it's really important for us to see to know what the results are and hopefully have a a more productive vegetation uh scheme.

Thank you very much.

Okay. Uh our next is a u certificate of compliance request file 15-2318.

That's number one matters lane uh map 95 lot one or lot 11, excuse me.

Uh, is there an owner applicant?

The owner's representative is present.

Okay. So, um, and it's the raise and rebuild. It was a raise and rebuild of a single family residence with garage, pool, cabana, patio, deck, retaining wall, walkways, and subsurface sewage disposal system. What is staff's recommendation on this request?

For this one, basically um when we completed our site visit, um once the COC request was submitted, we found that um there were some deviations on site from the approved plan. Um, and so I spoke with the applicant's representative, their engineer, and just basically asked them to make some revisions to the plan to really um, show the areas that were um, deviations from what was approved. Um, and then also to

update the COC request letter. Um, those have been re have been submitted. Um, and, uh, Mark plans to go through those with you all tonight. Uh my feeling is that this work was completed a number of years ago back in the approval was in 2016. Um the site is fully stabilized and I do think all of the while it should have gone through a request to amend process before the commission, it

didn't and we're here where we are right now. Um and um feel like those changes that did those deviations that did occur are things that the commission would have approved if it went through the request to amend process. Um so and that order is long expired. Um so my recommendation would be to move forward with the COC and we have all of um those changes memorialized um through you know

our file records. Um and then I'll I'll turn the uh mic over to the applicants engineer if you're um want to hear more about those deviations.

Yes, I would like to hear more. Uh so Mark you have the floor.

Uh good evening Mark Ritz from site design engineering representing the applicants. Um uh is it possible for me to do a screen share? Uh yes uh DCTV please let uh Mark share his screen.

Yes Mark you should be able to now.

Okay. Um what you should be seeing before you now is a plan of the uh the existing conditions the asbuilt plan. Um and as mentioned there were a couple of minor deviations. This this work was done approximately a decade ago and the owner contacted us recently for a COC.

So it's been a long time since we've we've touched this or looked at this. Um the main items that changed from what was approved uh in this area shown in red here stone patio uh this was previously part of the building and a wooden deck and instead they constructed a stone patio. Uh they added several granite lawn steps here to transition down to the lawn and kind of minimize a

little bit of the fill and grading that was approved in this area. Um also there are two small sort of landscaping retaining walls and a stepping stone walkway here. Um again these were done uh to sort of minimize fill in this area. The other sort of significant deviation uh occurs in this area where a uh a few stone steps were added uh a few stone pavers and a walkway and also uh some

stone walkway steps heading this way. Um previously the the pool just uh and patio ended ended here on on the approved plan. Um that's sort of the extent of the of the major deviations.

There were I think a few of the um patio edging uh may have been a couple feet off of from what was approved, but those deviations were, you know, on the order of a foot or two uh kind of dimensional changes. The these were the major the ma the more major items. uh we we feel that they're largely within the scope of of what was approved and I realize that they probably should have

come before you, but you know, we had no idea this work was occurring and it's been done now for probably close to a decade. So, uh we're hoping that the commission will will approve uh the COC with these minor changes. Thank you.

Uh Mark, just for the record, what is the date of the revised plan? the uh the date of the revised plan, it was revised uh today.

So uh July 7th, 2026.

I spoke with staff this morning and and uh there were requests to to update this. So we got it got it done and in into the commission this morning.

Appreciate that. Thank you. If you please may uh stop sharing so I can see everybody's face. There we go. Thank you. Uh, does any commissioner have any questions?

I don't see any. So at this point um I will entertain a motion to issue a complete COC on file 15-2318 one matter lane in accordance with the revised plan dated July 7 2026 which has been filed with the conservation commission move second we have a seconded motion on the floor roll call vote Donald yes Richard, yes.

Uh, Megan, yes.

James, yes.

Nat, yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mark. Uh, we're now moving on to our public hearings. And uh the first public hearing is a continued public hearing. NOI file 15-2825 zero state road map 53 lot 174 or lots excuse me. Yeah, that's 174 and then lots two and 24 respectively. Uh the applicant is Morgan Plum and the proposed project is the construction of a commercial automobile dealership with associated parking, grading, landscaping

and storm water infrastructure. The resource area is the 100 ft buffer zone to a bordering vegetated wetland and its applicable regulations here are 310 CMR 10.02, 02 10.55 and section 360-2 of town of Dartmouth bylaws. I'll entertain a motion to wave the reading.

Move.

Second.

We have a seconded motion on the floor.

Um roll call vote. Richard, yes.

James, yes.

Donald, yes.

Megan, yes.

Natt, yes. My vote is yes. that passes unanimously. As I had done in previous meetings, I will I need to recuse myself.

So, Nat, if you want to take over uh this meeting, I would appreciate it.

Sure. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, is there anyone here from the audience able to speak on this? I don't see anyone.

Jennifer Eduardo.

So, for this item, we received a continuance request today. Um the applicant is uh looking to submit their revised plans and their response to peerreview comments uh this week and so they're looking to continue to the um July 21st meeting.

Okay, understood. Thank you.

Any questions from the commission?

Okay, Jennifer, apologies. What was the date of our next meeting? You just mentioned it.

Okay. July 21st.

Okay.

Motion to continue this public hearing.

D file number 15-2825 or NOI 26-16 to July 21st. Our next meeting.

Second.

Motion's been seconded. Roll call vote.

Megan.

Yes.

Donald.

Yes.

Richard, yes.

James, yes.

And I vote yes. That passes unanimously.

All right. Good job. So now I can get back in. This is the continued public hearing. NOI file 15-2826 411 Fence Corner Road. That's map 63, lot 12. Um not sure is Mr. Young the owner or the applicant? But um we have Ray Young listed. Uh the representatives are um Tom Schultz and Phil Henry. And the proposed project is the construction of a 15,000 785 square foot convenience store parking

lot and gas station landscaping and storm water infrastructure on a previously developed site. The resource area involved here is a 100 foot buffer zone to a bordering vegetated wetland and the regulations involved are 310 CMR 10.02 2 10.55 and section 360-2 of the town of Dartmouth bylaws. I'll entertain a motion to wave the reading.

Second.

Second.

Second motion on the floor. We'll do roll call vote. James, yes.

Megan, yes.

Donald, yes.

Nat, yes.

Richard, yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

And is either Tom or Phil here?

Uh, they are not here. They submitted a request to continue. We're still um in the midst of the peerreview process. It should be wrapping up this week. Um, a couple minor changes going back and forth between uh the two sides and once we have those ironed out um we should have final plans. I would think like I said by the end of this week, early next week. Um, so they're asking to continue till July 21st.

That seems reasonable given what's going on.

Does any commissioner have any questions?

Was there anyone in the audience that was here specifically for this matter and wants to be heard this evening?

I don't see any. So, commissioners, I'll entertain a motion to continue at the applicant's request this public hearing until our next public hearing. Our meeting, excuse, July 21, 2026 at 7 p.m.

I'll move.

Second.

Second.

We have a seconded motion on the floor.

Roll call vote.

Yes.

Donald, yes.

Richard, yes.

Megan, yes. James.

Yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

We have a new uh public hearing. It's NOID file 15-2828 65 Victoria Street Map 150 lot 139.

The owners are Andrew Manard and Kimberly Mason. And the proposed project is the installation of a 500galon above ground propane tank on a concrete pad and two roof runoff recharge systems as well as minor grading fill and burm to direct storm water away from the house.

The resource area involved here is bordering land subject to flooding, the 100 ft buffer zone to bordering vegetated wetland and inland bank and 200 ft riverfront area uh with associated floodway. The regulations involved are 310 CMR, 10.02, 02 10.54 10.55 10.57 10.58 and section 360-2 of the town of Dartmouth bylaw. I'll entertain a motion to wave the reading.

So moved.

Second.

Second.

We have a second motion on the floor.

Roll call vote. Megan, yes.

James, yes.

Nat, yes. Donald, yes.

Richard, yes. My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously. Is there someone here this evening on behalf of Mr. Manard and Miss Mason?

Uh there isn't for this one either. Um we received a request to continue for this one as well. Um this one they're asking to continue about a month from now to our August 4th meeting. Um the reason for that is they received some pretty substantial comments from Mass D when um the state reviewed what was submitted. Um and the request was that it be submitted both to the town and the

state when they resubmit for additional review. Um so knowing that and then that there were also um the comments from the DPW engineer that the proposed um infiltration units, there's two proposed for the site um will require um witnessed soil test pits. Um so the town has to witness those when they're done.

Um requires some scheduling. So u that'll take a couple weeks to get scheduled and completed as well. um some concerns about it being, you know, the entire lot is in the flood zone. Um so some concerns about whether infiltration is really possible at this site or not.

Um for infiltration units. So um kind of with all all of those items that they need to take a deeper dive on and look at, they've requested a month um continuence at this point.

I think they'll need every bit of that based on what it sounds like they've got to do. Um does any commissioner have any questions?

Is there anyone in the anyone in the audience that came specifically for this and wants to be heard this evening?

I don't see any. So, commissioners, uh, I will entertain a motion to continue the public hearing on NOID file 15-2828 at the applicant's request until our August 4, 2026 meeting.

moved.

We have a seconded motion on the floor.

We're going to have a roll call vote.

James, yes.

Megan, yes.

Natt, yes.

Donald, yes.

Richard, yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

We're moving on. That concludes the public hearings. We're moving on to our discussion items. And the first is to discuss the commission's representative to serve on an advisory group uh to the agricultural commission.

So Jennifer or Eduardo, if you want to explain what they're looking for.

Sure. Um uh so the group reached out to us um I believe it was about a week and a half ago um looking for um to be added to the agenda um as a discussion item looking for rare representative to serve on a newly formed advisory group um to the agricultural commission. And this is driven by um at annual town meeting this year, a warrant article was approved um allocating funding from CPC specifically

towards agricultural preservation um restrictions. So preserving uh farmland property um in the town of Dartmouth and kind of protecting the agricultural character um and legacy of the town as well. Um there is a representative from the commission here, the agricultural commission um to speak on theou that's been put together um and um basically more about what they're expecting in terms of a meeting schedule

which sounds like it should be um you know a pretty easy lift. Um they're not expecting very frequent meetings except for when applications come in.

Okay. So, um, Andy, I guess you got the floor.

Yes. Uh, yes. Uh, my name is Andy Burns.

Um, uh, on the egg commission in Dartmouth um run Jordan Farm, um, out in the, uh, near Demer Floyd State Park. I've been uh, in the agricultural uh, side of Dartmouth now for 25 30 years. um was asked to join the uh a commission for uh probably three or four years ago. And one of the topics that we had discussed um at that point was trying to find funding um to supplement um uh the a

preservation trust which was a um an allocation of town funds that was expended I think from 2002 through 200 Well there's still a little bit of money left but there was um at one point there was 2 and 12 to 3 million dollars um that was utilized to support the acquisition of uh and preserve farmland in Dartmouth during that time frame. We the a commission um went to the CPC back

over a year ago and discussed the idea of funding that source of um you know the a preservation uh trust and we had obviously got a vote at town meeting and integral to that was setting up an advisory board of um comprised of uh many members of um you know a a member from several of the town boards finance um the capital improvements group you know planning conservation that would work with us when we have an

opportunity to preserve a key piece of farmland. Now what I one thing that's important here is that we look at this as being a piece of the overall uh plan um you know to preserve a specific farm in that you know the cost of land today um we still have a few large parcels in the town um that would far outstrip our um million and a half dollars that we've allocated. But we can partner with other

organizations like DNRT like uh Buzzards Bay Coalition Farmland uh American Farmland Trust. There are a variety of different organizations that have supported uh the preservation of farmland in our region and we look at it as being an active partner to identify and contribute some funding from the town of Dartmouth for the preservation of our farmland.

One of the particular aspects of it that I'm fascinated by is that there not many large parcels available. you can that are still farmed in Dartmouth today. You know, if you look at the patterns of development in Dartmouth over the last 50 or 60 years, you know, um the subdivision land has basically been gobbled up or, you know, big parcels of land um have been preserved throughout the town. Um, there are a few

large parcels remaining, but I think that the important piece for what the A commission will be focusing on are the smaller parcels that are in chapter 61A that come before the town. They're getting converted. you, let's say you have five acres in a house um in North Dartmouth where you're in chapter 61A.

You have the benefit of um you know uh just a house single house lot uh taxes but you decide you want to put you know one or two houses on that parcel. You would have to go to the town have the town has when a parcel is taken out of chapter 61A, the town has an option to buy it at the offered price. And this is a process that has been going on more frequently

in Dartmouth over the last number of years. And I think that um the these funds um my you know thought is that those funds will be very very helpful in dealing with the smaller parcels that get converted for development which because that's where there's a lot of farmland scattered throughout the town in 15 10 5 acre parcels that are in 61A that are likely going to be the subject of

development um in the in the coming years and this will enable us to participate and uh continue to encourage farming in Dartmouth.

That's a long- winded answer. I hope I hope that gives a a bit of a description of what we're doing. And obviously this the advisory board's model the earlier effort um to preserve farmland that was very frankly was very successful. I don't know how many of you are familiar with Copicut Farm in the old Golden Belt uh farm up in North Dartmouth, but that was a a specific project that would never have happened

without um the egg preservation trust fund. And today that is, you know, it's a a thriving agricultural business that has preserved a longtime Dartmouth um scenic part of the town as well as obviously productive farmland.

Thank you. Andy, just for clarification of the any commissioner that might be interested, what do you anticipate the um number of meetings per year might be?

I think it's you know maybe hard to say what the development activity will be and what what what the opportunities we don't see any particular opportunities today on the horizon.

Um, if you'd asked this question 8 months ago, um, we had a a property down on Jordan Road near where we farm that, uh, the GO property that, um, 15 acre parcel that DNRT was assigned the right of first refusal, but they got tangled up in a problem and had to uh, exceed to a 17 acres and they allowed the land owner uh to build on one lot in that the regulations

under 61A which are ancient allowed for up to 30% of the land to be developed for a house site and it it just got if if we had had this money in place a year ago um a beautiful field would have been saved in um in perpetuity but it's going to end up as a house lot. Now, I think that dealing with each one of these cases might take two or three

meetings. Um, you know, a presentation of the the facts to the advisory board, get input, go work on it, maybe a month later, you have a a formal, okay, here's how we proceed with this uh particular opportunity. But I don't, you know, I don't see that it's 10 meetings a a year. My guess is you're going to have one or two projects that come before the committee um before the a

commission um the ad committee a year.

That's my own just wild a wag wild ass guess.

No, I I appreciate that. And I'm just I was asking for the guess because clearly you don't know what you can't know, which is how many of these projects come up. But that's a that's a pretty good estimation.

Um, commissioners, you heard the ask. Is there any commissioner that's uh Oh, Jennifer, I didn't notice your hand was raised.

That's okay. Um, I just wanted to also say that in talking with um the person from the ad commission that came by and asked us to put this on the agenda, um, Sue, um, her feeling because I I did ask her about that, um, because I had a feeling commissioners would would want to know before, um, volunteering to to be on another committee or board in town. um her feedback was was similar um

and basically said it's you know it's not like our commission where we have regularly two meetings a month. Um it'll be sporadic um depending on what's coming through as far as applications.

So there might be, you know, um, three meetings in a row spread out over, you know, a couple of months and then there could be several months with no meetings um, if there's nothing coming through uh, as potential inquiries. And and the idea is that they're looking for um, for this advisory group for members from several different groups in town to provide input to the agricultural

commission specific to obviously in this case wetlands. um uh and just get feedback from the commission in that regard.

Appreciate it. Okay, commissioners, you've heard the request and a little bit about what's being done. Is there any commissioner that would like to serve?

And uh other than that, I can I can tell you we will have a representative, but is there anyone who really wants to do this? I think I give you first dibs.

I'm not seeing a great rush forward. So, I will volunteer to serve.

Oh, Mike, that'd be great. One thing I I was just thinking is I fully respect people's time and you know, there's just not enough time in the day to get stuff done. Um, you know, you could do it on a rotating basis where because it will be so specific to a given project. It might be that one of the commissioners wants to deal with a piece of land um up in North D. Somebody

wanted might deal with it in, you know, um, in in South D. Who knows? I mean it it's going to be as Sue outlined it will be on a projectby project basis that we we would convene the advisory board.

So but obviously Mike would we we haven't connected in years but would fully respect working with you.

I I look you're welcome. I mean, this is a subject near and dear to my heart. So, um, uh, anyway, I think it's inappropriate for me to ask for a motion to appoint myself. So, although, you know, maybe I could run for public office, but I I just don't see that. Um, so if uh, Natt, if you want to just take over that and ask for the motion, um, I I'll be working to,

sir. Thank you, Mike. I'd like to entertain a motion to appoint Mike Kho as the Dartmouth Conservation Commission representative to the Agricultural Commission.

So moved.

Second.

Motion's been seconded. Roll call vote.

Donald, yes.

Richard, yes.

James, yes.

Megan, yes.

And I vote yes. Do I need your vote, Mike?

I have to keep voting for myself. That's what I thought. That's what I thought.

Okay. That passes unanimously.

I guess I can.

Yeah.

All right. Look forward to it.

Uh my my u email and whatnot is at conservation, but uh not a problem.

Great.

Either call or email.

Thank you very much. I appreciate the time. You're very welcome. Thank you for the explanation.

Okay. Take care.

All right. Now, it's Jennifer's time with our enforcement orders and notices of violation.

Yeah. Not the best part of the the meeting. Um Well, thank you. If I could share my screen.

Sure.

Okay.

Um, so sorry, move this out of the way.

Um, so just to give a sense of place, um, for the first two items, these are enforcement orders, uh, 20260 and 20263.

Um, for 700 Old Fall River Road and zero Old Fall River Road that were both of these enforcement orders were issued previously by the commission.

Um I I initially issued them and then the commission ratified them retroactively.

Um the property owner has continued to perform work on the property. um has not complied with the cease and desist that was part of the enforcement order, has not installed any erosion controls, and then has, you know, further compounded the issues by continuing to do work including bringing in several truckloads of material uh both rock and fill um from a nearby site and um depositing it

along the uh bank of the Copa Cut River, which falls on his parcel between the two parcels. Um I'll just use the the cursor to kind of point those out a little bit more. So he's doing work on the entirety of 700 Oldf River Road. Um this zero Oldf Fall River Road parcels, the work is a little more limited. Um but because the river falls along the property line and he's doing work

directly in the river itself, um we felt it was important to issue enforcement orders for both of those. Um the work has been so extensive that in a butter called and uh Dartmouth PD and asked them to respond uh not this weekend but the weekend prior. Um Dartmouth PD in turn um called Mass D Environmental Police who responded um to the situation. Uh they are pursuing it as well. Um but we would like to refer

this um because the a property owner is continuing to do work and not complying with the cease and desist. Uh we would like to ask the commission to refer this to town council for further and immediate legal action.

Does any commissioner have any questions?

I don't see any. um at this juncture I just think it's appropriate that return turn it over to town council. I mean clearly uh letters from us have gone unheeded and the activity that's occurring post the issuance of the enforcement order is a complete disregard of the enforcement order. So, I think it's time for us to get town council involved and to have the weight of the court who can then

perhaps get to this particular person to understand what he's doing is wrong and it needs to be remedied. So, I'll um entertain a motion to um uh Mike, I'll leave it up to you as whether you think they should be each their own motion or if they can be one.

Um you know, I I really think they should be separate just because there may be a separation in the litigation.

Think that makes sense.

Yeah, that's what my concern is. are.

So um so we're going to talk about, uh, EO 2062602, that's 700 Old Fall River Road, and entertain a motion to u request town council to take this matter on behalf of the conservation commission.

So moved.

Second.

Was seconded motion on the floor. Roll call vote. Richard, yes.

James, yes.

Donald, yes.

Natt, yes.

Megan, yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

I'll now take entertain a motion for EO2606-03 0 Old Fall River Road uh map 71, lot 81 to um request that town council take this matter on and pursue further legal action on behalf of the conservation commission.

So moved.

Second.

We have a seconded motion on the floor.

Roll call vote. James, yes.

Matt, yes.

Donald, yes.

Megan, yes.

Richard, yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously. U is the third one's a separate item, right? Different person.

Um, well, separate item, same person.

So, the same thing you just described.

So, I'm going to recommend that EO2202605 600C, Old Fall River Road, map 71, lot 71, um that we uh issue um a request where the town council gets involved and represents the conservation commission in this matter.

So, seconded motion on the floor. Roll call vote.

Megan, yes.

Natt, yes.

Donald, yes.

James, yes.

Richard, yes.

That motion passes unanimously.

Well, I guess town council is going to like us.

Keeping keeping us busy and keeping them busy, that's for sure. Unfortunately, we'd like to be busier with other stuff, but this is pretty important.

Yeah. But, you know, I got to tell you, this is unfortunately part of what we do. It's not the it's not the fun part for sure, and it's not the part that gives you satisfaction. But if we don't do this part, it's going to be awfully difficult to have compliance in a in a somewhat voluntary fashion, right? I mean, so people will come before us first, ask permission or at least determination of whether

permission is warranted before they do things. If we allow this stuff to continue on unchecked, that'll never happen.

Yep. I agree.

So I, you know, I don't like doing this.

It it it certainly pains me. It's also a resource of town treasury on something which is not beneficial to the rest of the citizens of the town. Right?

So it's not like putting in a playground or opening a park or anything of that sort. I don't think any of us get great satisfaction out of this. But when somebody calls upon us to take action, we have a duty to do so.

So, I think we did the right thing. I have nothing further to add for tonight's meeting, but if anyone else does, please just let me know.

I don't see any. So, I'll entertain a motion to adjurnn.

Second.

Second.

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

James, yes.

Donald, yes. Natt, yes.

Megan, yes.

My vote is yes. Meeting is adjourned.

Thank you everyone. Appreciate your attendance.

Have a good night. Have a good night.

Thank you.