Conservation Commission Meeting March 24, 2026

Good evening.

Uh good evening.

Hi. Uh according to my clock, it's now 7 o'clock and we do have a full Well, we don't have a full compliment, but we certainly have a quorum of commissioners. So, I will call to order the Dartmouth Conservation Commission for its Tuesday, March 24, 2026 public meeting.

Our meeting tonight is conducted remotely.

We're doing it as a result of legislation signed by Healey on March 28, 2025, further extending uh hybrid remote meeting options for municipalities. Uh she extended that option until June 30, 2027.

People in the audience have the ability to participate uh by uh using the uh raise your hand feature or wave your hand and uh at the appropriate time you will be unmuted and allowed to speak on the subject at hand.

Um, I will point out that we will uh uh request that you stay muted until you speak so that ambient noise isn't picked up and interfere with anyone's presentation.

That being uh said and out of the way, we have one administrative item. We receive and approve the minutes for February 10, 2026.

May I have a motion to that effect, please?

So move.

We have a seconded motion on the floor.

Roll call vote. James, yes.

Liz, yes.

Megan, yes.

Donald, yes.

And my vote is yes. Motion passes unanimously.

There are no field trip reports this evening, so we'll move right on to our public hearings.

And the first public hearing is a continued public hearing DP file 15-2808 NOI 2541 on the notice of intent from 600 PMs land trust care of David M. Divonum to construct the residential pier and perform improvements to the existing cart path within land subject to coastal storm flowage. land under the ocean land um containing shellfish uh the 100 ft buffer zone to a salt marsh and within 100 200 ft um

riverfront area the regulations are 310 CMR 10.02 10.04 10.25 25 10.32 10.34 as well as section 360-2 of the town of Dartmouth bylaw.

The land is described as map 19 lot 20_2 is otherwise known as 600 PMs road. Uh entertain a motion to wave the reading.

So moved.

Second.

Second.

We have a seconded motion. Roll call vote. James.

Yes.

Liz.

Yes.

Megan.

Yes.

Donald, yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously. Earlier today, Eduardo received and forwarded to me a request by the applicant's engineer, David Devman, to table this matter until later in the um agenda. he has to be at a different municipality's public hearing on behalf of a client and obviously couldn't be at two places at the same time. So, I would entertain a motion to table uh item number one, which has just

been read into the record until uh the end of the public hearings.

So, move second.

Second.

We have a seconded motion on the floor.

Roll call vote. James, yes. Liz, yes.

Megan, yes.

Donald, yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

Our second public hearing is a continued public hearing, D file 15-2812 NOI 26-2.

It's on the after the-act notice of intent from Stephen Gorden Godo uh for approval of for a restoration project associated with a previously unauthorized disturbance within the 100 ft buffer zone to a bordering vegetated wetland. The regulations involved are 310 CMR 10.02 02 10.55.

Uh, and I I imagine it also includes our town of Dartmouth bylaws, which which would be um section 360-2.

And the parcel is described as map 165, lots 16 and 17, and map 174, lot 80.

It's otherwise known as 566 State Road.

I'll obtain a motion to wave the reading please.

So moved.

Second.

We have a seconded motion on the floor.

Roll call vote. James, yes.

Liz, yes.

Megan, yes.

Donald, yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

Um, is there somebody here this evening that wishes to present this application?

Yeah, it would be me. Uh sir um Chris Vandenberg with Scitech Engineering and Environmental Consultants. Um so unfortunately um we our wetlands consultant did make his way out to the site. Um he said he he he provided us with a um updated wetland delineation and report um at the end of the day today. Obviously it's it's too late for the um commissioner's review andor kind of our review. Um so that is where we

stand. Um, and at at this point, I think we'd be respectfully requesting a tinuence until the next meeting to get everything resolved, review the wetland report, um, and assess and revise the, um, plan accordingly.

Um, has that wetland report been shared with the staff?

No. No, we just we at Scitec just received it at the end of the day today.

Um well I'd recommend that it be shared with staff as soon as possible so that they have a chance to review it and not just at a few days before the meeting. So, um, that would be very helpful.

Uh, I this is, you know, an after the fact notice of intent, so we we really like to see things progress quickly on these after the facts, but if you just received it today, obviously it you're quite right. it would have been too late to submit so that we could have a hearing and close the hearing tonight.

But, uh, I do think it'd be appropriate for staff to have it as soon as possible so they can review it and whatnot.

Uh, commissioners, do you have any questions about what you heard?

Is there anyone in the audience that wanted to speak on this particular application tonight?

I don't see anybody and there was no commissioner that wanted to be heard.

Commissioners, I'd entertain a motion to continue this public hearing until our next meeting, which is April 14, 2026 at 7 p.m.

So moved.

Second.

Have a seconded motion on the floor.

Roll call vote. James, yes.

Liz, yes.

Megan, yes.

Donald, yes. My vote is yes. That passes unanimously. Our third Mr.

I'm sorry.

Oh, just a thank you.

Oh. Oh, you're you're welcome. You're welcome.

Um, our third public hearing is a continued public hearing D file 15-2815 NOI 26-4.

It's on the notice of intent from Craig Marshall for multiple owners uh for the construction of a 12 foot by 13 foot screen porch addition to an existing single family house. The installation of a 1,000galon subsurface propane tank on a 5-ft by 20ft concrete pad buried and associated grading within the 200 ft riverfront area. land subject to coastal storm flowage, the 100 ft buffer zone uh

to a coastal bank and bordering vegetated wetlands.

The applicable regulations are 310 CMR 10.02 10.04 10.30 30 10.55 10.58 and section 360-2 of the Town of Dartmouth bylaws. And within the NHSP designated habitat on land described as map 10, lot 9-3. It's otherwise known as 254E PMSA Road. I'll obtain a motion to wave the reading.

So moved.

Second.

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

Liz, yes.

Megan, yes.

Donald, yes.

I must recuse myself from this matter, so I can't vote. And um James or Liz, if you want to take over, either one of you um take over the meeting. I'll have to recuse myself until it's over.

Liz, I'll I'll bow out to you.

All right. I'll do my best here.

Uh let's see. I believe the next course of action is to um ask if there's anybody here on behalf of the applicant who would like to speak this evening. Um there is. Uh good evening everyone. For the record, I'm Mark Bucher with CAB Engineering Solutions, Inc. Um we have submitted this notice of intent. Um hoping to get uh a vote tonight. This hearing has been continued several times

for various reasons. And um I'd be more than happy to run through it if anyone needs me to, but you may have all heard um basically what's being proposed is a screen porch and a buried propane tank at this location. Um as of the last public hearing, uh it was continued because lack of a quorum. Um the only um reason that it was continued previously was because we had not heard back from

natural heritage folks which as of the last meeting we did in fact receive a letter of no take which was submitted to the commission. Um, so, uh, I'd be happy to answer any questions if there are any, or we would, um, be seeking a, uh, a positive vote, uh, to issue an order of conditions.

Okay. And, um, Eduardo, I'd be curious to hear your thoughts from staff on this particular project.

Um like u Mark uh was saying um uh basically Natural Heritage came back to us and said there was uh no problem with the project on hand. There was a letter of note take was sent to us on the project. Um, we're recommending a standard order of conditions uh per the plan date of January 8th, 2026.

Okay. And commissioners, do you have any questions for this particular project?

I'm not seeing any. Is there anybody in the audience that would like to be heard on this particular project?

I am also not seeing any hands.

Uh at this juncture, I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing.

So moved.

Second.

Roll call vote. James, yes.

Megan, yes.

Donald, yes.

And my vote is yes. That commences the public hearing and now we're going to vote on the particular notice of intent. Um, I'll entertain a motion to vote yes for the continued public hearing D file 15-2815, notice of intent 26-4.

Uh, and the notice of intent from Craig Marshall. Um, do I have a motion to that effect?

So moved.

Second.

Uh, let me, uh, backtrack here. I'd like to also add in, um, we are passing this motion with a standard order of conditions, uh, per the plan dated January 8th, 2026. Can I get a remotion to that effect?

Motion. Uh, so moved.

Second.

Roll call vote. James. Yes, Megan.

Yes, Donald.

Yes, and my vote is yes. That motion passes.

Thank you, everyone. Have a good evening.

You as well.

Good job, Liz.

Thank you.

Particularly where you didn't know in advance you were going to be doing it.

Nope. First time.

Nothing like getting thrown into into the deep end of the pool, as they say.

That's okay. I'm glad I I'm glad I could execute for you, Mike.

There you go. You did a great job. So, we're moving on now to the fourth public hearing, which is a public hearing local bylaw file. So, this is not a state file. um DWP 0010 NOI26-10 on the notice of intent from seed dib care of Jamie Besonet for the construction of two buildings with associated paving grading tree removal and utilities within the 100 ft buffer to a locally jurisdictional freshwater

wetland. And the um regulation is in our town bylaws, which is section 360-2.

It's on land described as map 163, lots 62 and 63, um addressed 813 State Road.

May I have a motion to wave the reading?

So moved.

Second.

We have a seconded motion on the floor.

Roll call vote. James, yes.

Liz, yes. Megan, yes.

Donald, yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

Uh, is someone here this evening to present on behalf of the U owner applicant?

Uh, yes. Good evening, Jamie Beset with Zenith Consulting Engineers.

Jamie, you have the floors.

Uh, may I share my screen?

Uh, DCTV, please let uh Jamie share the screen.

Thank you.

All right. Can everyone see my plan?

Yes, I can.

Yes.

All right. Great.

All right. So, tonight what we have before you is a a filing under the local act for u a isolated wetland that actually falls up in this in a rock formation in this area off of State Road. Um right now, presently the site is a car dealership. uh this being the existing building and there's um you know there's cars that are al in the parking lot here and just to get your

bearings um just to the uh it would be west is Dunkin Donuts on the corner here um what we're proposing is uh a special permit with the planning board that we've been working on uh for uh 15 units uh age restricted um so that's over 55 on this property and we will be getting rid of the auto dealership. Um the portion with the wetlands as it concerns us, uh the wetland was delineated years

back um and actually filed I believe under a um an RDA uh with a different company. Uh we have located the flags, added them to our plan and um filed for the notice of intent under the local bylaw. As you can see, we're keeping everything outside of the 25 foot for disturbance. There is some work in the 100 foot buffer here. You'll see some permeable pavers for additional parking.

There's some uh tree removal. There'll be a portion of the duplex stalling here and a small portion of a duplex stalling there. Um there's some roadway, um some landscaping, and this is kind of a common area where we're planning on maybe some grills and children's playset etc.

Um, I'm going to change plan views here.

U, this is in a unique situation because like I said, this is kind of up in a rock formation. So, you'll see we have uh exposed ledge here and you'll see the grades actually go up considerably to this wetland um here. So, you'll see a 118, 117, 116. Our road is at 112, 111, 110 down towards the existing grades that we have here now. Um, so we're not worried about erosion getting into the

into the wetland as it's upgradient from our work. Um, the drainage on site here is not going to be aimed there. We're actually proposing an infiltration basin towards the front where we have very nice soils. Uh, so we plan on putting uh the storm water in here for infiltration. Um, and also the project is proposed to be serviced by sewer and water. Um, I'm happy to try to answer

any questions that the commission might have on this file.

Thank you very much. Um, Eduardo, I want to hear staff's comments on this proposal.

Um, like Jame was saying, the wetland uh itself uh was too small to be considered um land subject to close land subject to flooding. um according to the state uh regulations. Uh so they're filing this through the bylaw. Um and as Jamie was saying, most of the most of the wetland is in in terms of contours pretty pretty far from the uh actual work that's being taken place. Um so we're recommending

uh standard order of conditions uh without the restoration conditions per the revised plan dated January 13th, 2026 with um modified condition to read uh special condition 41. All storm water features constructed must be fully consistent with those reviewed and approved by the DT DPW's engineering division as they have reported.

Thank you. Does any commissioner have any questions?

I haven't seen any. Is there anyone in the audience that wants to speak on this application?

I don't see any I don't see any hands being raised.

Commissioners, I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing.

So move.

Second.

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

Liz, yes.

Megan, yes.

Donald, yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

Uh, commissioners, I'll entertain now a motion uh to issue a standard order of conditions in accordance with the uh revised plan dated January 13, 2026 with modified condition 41 as read into the record by uh Eduardo.

So move second.

Second.

We have a seconded motion on the floor.

Roll call vote. James. Yes, Liz.

Yes, Megan.

Yes, Donald.

Yes, my vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

We're moving on to page two. Um, this is public hearing number five. It's D file 15-2800 AOC 262 26-2, excuse me. Uh, it's to amend an order of conditions from James Mullen and Nola Anderson, care of Crawford Land Management. The applicant seeks to manage an additional small stand approximately 395 square ft of Fragmitees.

I'm not going to try to say the whole word, just fragmitees. Located west of the existing dwelling along a portion of beach lane, it's within land subject to coastal storm flowage and the 100 ft buffer zone to a coastal beach. The regulations are 310 CMR 10.02, 10.04 10.27 and section 360-2 of the town of Dartmouth bylaws. It's on land described as map 87, lot one, otherwise known as

Zero Beach Lane. I'll entertain a motion to wave the reading. So moved.

Second.

We have a seconded motion on the floor.

Roll call vote. James, yes.

Liz, yes.

Megan, yes.

Ronald, yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously. Uh, if someone is here on behalf of the applicant, uh, please state your name and you will have the floor.

Uh, yep, that's me. I'm Andrea Bjan from Crawford Land Management. Um, and I can share my screen to show you the plan if that's helpful.

Um, certainly. Uh, DCTV, please let uh Andy uh share her screen.

Okay, here we go. Can you see that?

Not yet.

Oh, what about now?

It's Yep. Now I see it.

Okay, perfect. Um so as uh Chair Mike just mentioned um we're requesting to amend order of conditions SE152800 um on behalf of of the applicants Nola Anderson and James Mullen. Um the order of conditions permits habitat restoration of the salt marsh and adjacent upland areas. And this amendment request seeks to include one additional small stand of fragmitees which is approximately approximately 395

square ft located just west of the dwelling. Um management of the stand follows the methods outlined in the already approved land management plan.

stocks will be stocks of fragmitees will be cut and treated um with an EPA approved aquatic herbicide and all treatments will be performed by a licensed applicator. Um, again like what was already permitted, maintenance treatments are proposed to continue throughout the life of the permit to ensure effective control and reduce chances of recolonization.

Um, and I also want to just note that NHSP has reviewed our submitted documents and confirmed that the revised plans are consistent with their previous noake determination and that the MISA determination letter issued on August 28th, 2025 um remains valid. So, um, we appreciate your consideration and I'd be happy to answer any questions if if there are any.

Thank you, Mhm. Eduardo. I would certainly like to hear staff's recommendations.

Um, yes. Uh, so as Andy was saying, this is just um another patch of fragmitees from the NOI. we received uh a couple months ago for the bigger patch. Um uh correct me if I'm wrong here, Andy, but I believe uh you are waiting for approval from the uh owners uh for to add include this patch in uh hence the uh amended order uh later down the line.

Yeah, that's correct. they just wanted to make sure it wouldn't be the treatment protocols wouldn't be an issue and um there were some health things going on with the owner. So, um, in an effort to not delay the treatment of what what's on Nola Anderson's property and what could be managed sooner, um, we went ahead with the original order of conditions and decided that we would

amend the order if if or when um, the AB butter wanted to proceed with the work.

And so we did receive um permission from um said property owner and a written letter was included in the filing um packet that we submitted.

Um given what Andy said, um once again it's it's just an inclusion of that small uh little patch of fragmitees from the bigger one. Uh so we're recommending uh the commission issue u an amended order consistent with the original order issued under this file number for the original request on September 24th, 2025 uh as per the plans dated uh July 14th, 2025. September 11th, 2025 and February 26th, 2026.

Okay.

Does any commissioner have any questions?

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

I don't see any. I'll entertain a motion to close the public hearing.

So moved. Second.

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

Liz, yes.

Megan, yes.

Ronald, yes.

My vote is yes. Commissioner, so I'll entertain a motion uh to issue an amended order of conditions consistent with the uh plans that had been submitted previously and with this application. those plans being uh July 14 2025 September 11, 2025, February 26, 2026.

All of which are uh the first two of which uh were also approved with with file 15-2800 uh previously by this commission.

So moved.

Second.

We have a seconded motion on the floor.

Roll call vote. James, yes.

Liz, yes.

Megan, yes.

Donald, yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

That loops us back to the first item, public hearing. Has Mr. Dignon uh appeared?

Um, he apparently isn't. And we do have at least a couple of items for discussion.

So Eduardo, why don't we move into the items for discussion, giving Mr. Devnon a little more time to appear.

Um, we have one discussion item relating to 38 Lakeside A. Uh this is pertaining to this is just an update essentially saying that we received the revised plan in the office uh prior to the March 19th 2026 deadline.

Oh good. That was that was the point of consternation before, wasn't it?

But um as far as I'm aware, I haven't we haven't gotten any sign off or any notice that they fall over has signed off on the NOI application.

Um so we're still waiting on on that in that regard.

What's the deadline for that for the sign off for Fall River?

Correct.

Um that is a great question.

I don't know if I have that information with me at the moment, but I can uh I can send that over to you.

Yeah. What I'm going to recommend is um that we acknowledge receipt of the letter you did get and then in that acknowledgement remind applicants that we still need that Fall River um sign off and whatever date we said we would have it. I'd like it in there as a reminder just so they um we have we told them that very expressly at the last meeting, but I always think it's a good idea to to send

that reminder so they can't say that they they were blindsided by that.

Uh commissioners were waiting for Mr.

Dignon.

Um, and he did say he would be available. He thought sometime around 7:30.

Um, it's just 7:30 now or thereabouts.

Um, I don't want to hold everybody up all night, but um, perhaps we can give them a few minutes if that's okay with everybody else.

Yeah, absolutely.

Okay.

you know. So, I'm going to turn my my I'm going to leave it on, but I'm going to turn my my uh video off so I can gulp down a half a gallon of water here. So, but I'll be here.

Okay, now I'm hydrated.

Mr. chair and thinking about it, I don't know if we voted or added into the conditions for 38 Lakeside AB a due date for Fall River sign off. I think we extended the rehabilitation efforts an extra an additional month, but I don't recall any dates. Um, Eduardo I'm sure can confirm, but I don't know if anyone else feels otherwise.

I, you know, I couldn't remember a date and I that's why I said I'd have to go look at my notes from that meeting to see if we ever did that. Maybe we didn't. Um, but I think I would certainly want to remind them that we can't entertain the request until Fall River signs off.

and and that that poses a major I mean I think I do recall telling them that without the sign off they'd be committing a trespass and I I just didn't remember whether we gave them a date or not and I couldn't recall what that date was. So I but if we didn't, we just should remind them they got to really get that. And I know um they did indicate at the meeting that

they had made an effort, but it sounded like they made an effort and then let it lapse because they didn't get a response and they weren't on top of it and calling every day or better yet physically going to city hall.

and we recommended they do that instead of just sending them a letter or an email and then waiting two months with no action.

I can uh Mr. German, I can certainly take a look at my notes uh come tomorrow um and give you all an update uh to see if there was a uh a specific deadline that we held them to when it came to that.

Okay. And if not, I still will remind them, hey, listen, you know, please update us on your efforts to get Fall River to sign off. And I'd like it a little more detailed than we tried. You know, I'd like them to tell me what they did. Uh, and because I I have a feeling nobody really wants to go to city hall.

It's sometimes hours and you feel very frustrated. But I think that's the best way to actually get somebody to do something over there.

Well, it's been my experience in other matters. It just sometimes a little shoe leather is required uh to be spent on these matters. It's not all emails and text messages.

Um, well, I hate to close the meeting with without him knowing that we've done this, but um, this meeting went a lot faster than I think anybody thought.

And given where he is, that meeting can go longer than anybody thought. That's also been my experience with that community. Um, so he could be until 8 o'clock and I don't want to I don't want to hold everybody up. Um, so I don't know if people are here for that meeting or not, but um I'm going to, you know, at this point I'm going to say we we've given some time. It's now according to my watch

7:35.

So, um I'll entertain a motion to adjourn. Uh but before we do so, I think we should probably continue um item number one until the next public hearing and let him know that I won't I won't take action on his matter without him here because he was courteous enough to give us advanced notice of his conflict.

But um we've gone through the agenda and you know as much as I love talking to everybody and I can talk all night, I don't think that's in anyone's best interest to hear me for the rest of the night. So, are there any members of the public that wanted to speak on that hearing?

I don't know. Um, good point. But if there are, we haven't even had the present, well, we had a presentation at previous meetings, but if there's somebody here this evening that's that wants to speak directly on the uh public hearing number one, which is the 600 PMSA road, please wave your hand or raise your hand or let us know somehow.

I don't see any um I don't recall, frankly, Donald, anybody at the previous two meetings on this matter other than us. And uh we're discussing with um the harbor master and uh whether or not the harbor master's um communications would be the last communications we received on the matter and it didn't address the alternative that came up afterwards if I recall all that correctly. So we really had to make

a decision of whether to go forward without the harbor master directly opining regarding an option that they've now selected.

And I do think it you know it's appropriate that we um you know don't take action without Mr. divign here particularly and that um uh I just think it's uh appropriate that we entertain a motion to continue that till the next public hearing.

So which yeah, which I'll put the date in which is April 14 at 2026 at 7 p.m.

So move. We have a motion secondly.

Seconded. Roll call vote. James, yes.

Liz, yes.

Megan, yes.

Donald, yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously. I'll now entertain a motion to adjourn this public hearing of March 24 2026.

So moved.

Second.

A seconded motion. Roll call vote.

James, yes. Liz, yes.

Megan, yes.

Donald, yes.

My vote is yes. The meeting is adjourned. Thank you everyone.