Conservation Commission Meeting - May 26, 2026

I'm going to call to order the Town of Dartmouth Conservation Commission meeting for Tuesday, May 26, 2026.

We have a quorum of commissioners present. [clears throat] And there may be a commissioner who comes on board a little later in the meeting. If so, I will make the announcement. We're conducting this meeting remotely as a result of Governor Healey signing on March 28, 2025.

A further extension for the hybrid remote option for municipalities.

That extension goes through June 30, 2027.

Our public hearings are fully accessible. Uh there's a raise your hand feature, a chat feature, and then if everything else fails, just make some kind of a movement so we'll know you are interested in speaking. Um this not this meeting was noticed appropriately in accordance with Massachusetts general laws and town of Dartmouth bylaws, and we're conducting it in that fashion.

Um, that being said, uh, first order of business for me is to welcome our new environmental affairs coordinator, Jennifer Miller. Uh, Jennifer, I'm very happy to have you on board. This is your first meeting. And, uh, hopefully we're going to see a lot of exciting uh, changes in the Conservation Commission's um, protocols and how how things are done. I'm looking forward to your um input, your new set of eyes on

something. We you have a lot of um I think a lot of the commissioners as far as I can see are more than willing to lend a hand to help you to talk with you. Um so please use us as a resource as well as Eduardo who is a holdover from the previous administration. But um we've been very fortunate here in Dartmouth to have exceptional environmental affairs coordinators. Uh that's not always the case in many

communities. They give the duties to somebody wearing two or three or four different hats and unfortunately conservation is not their primary hat.

We're not that way here and we're very fortunate. So thank you for coming on board and we look forward to working with you.

Thank you. So, I appreciate the warm welcome and look forward to working with all of you and excited for what lies ahead.

Yep, we're we're here. We got a it's a it's a fairly big town with with sort of diverse environmental issues and um interesting times too. So, I'll say that. Interesting times it is. And um this is the first instance where I've had the fortune of having some overlap with the outgoing person.

Um, so it was great to spend a few days with Mark and um, get the lay of the land from his perspective. Certainly, um, a lot of institutional knowledge there. So, I really appreciated that and looking forward to getting to know all of you and your insight on the town and um, current priorities. And then Eduardo's been a wonderful resource as well.

Good to hear that. And I I knew he would be. I had every bit of confidence in you, Eduardo. Uh but I also feel that you know we're very fortunate here to have competent and professional um assistance in in doing our jobs as commissioners. Okay. We rely heavily on the expertise that is in that conservation office and um I'm looking forward to it.

We'll order a business now.

Nice meeting you.

Yes. Yes. Thank you.

Uh is to receive and approve the minutes from the April 14, 2026 meeting.

We have a motion on We have a second on the motion.

We have a seconded motion on the floor.

We'll do a roll call vote.

Richard, yes.

Liz, yes.

Megan, yes.

James, yes.

And I don't see Donald. My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

We have two field trip reports tonight.

The first is a wetland site inspection determination of applicability approval.

It's a minor project as per the new regulations that we finally got promulgated and it's A and B. So A is for 706 Elm Street, B is for one Madera Court. As you remember, uh, in before we did the new regulations, we didn't even bring this up at the public meeting. It was done administratively in the office.

Um, I don't know who to ask. Is it going to be you, Jennifer, or you, Eduardo, that'll give us staff's recommendations?

Um, well, I don't want to steal Eduardo's thunder. He really did the initial site visits. I just went out with him after the fact so I could kind of get a sense of what wetland site inspections are all about. Um, so, um, I I will let Eduardo speak and if there's anything I want to add, I'll I'll jump in.

Very good. Eduardo, floor is yours, my friend.

Um, so yes. So, um, uh, Jennifer and I, uh, went out to two site inspections. uh one over at 76 706 Elm Street uh where uh we placed uh four wetland flags uh deliating uh the edge of a small sour salt marsh um over at the end of the property there. Um there is some riverbank uh which uh we'll be expecting to be um placed on the plans for uh the ADU

structure that is being planned for 7706 Elm Street. Um, and as for uh one Medator Court, uh once again, Jennifer and I both walked uh that entire site um and found no evidence of any wetlands or any areas of under jurisdiction. Uh so we're recommending the commission uh approve both wetland lines or rather one wetland line and the other no wetland line.

All right. So, I'll entertain a motion to approve. Oh, I'm sorry. I'm skipping.

I'm skipping. Do any commissioners have any questions?

I don't see any. So, I'll entertain a motion to approve the wetland line for 706 Elm Street and to um issue a negative determination of applicability for one Madura Court.

So, moved.

Second.

You have a seconded motion on the floor.

Roll call vote. Richard, yes.

Megan, yes.

Liz, yes.

James, yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

Um, our third or our second field trip report is also a request for determination of applicability, RDA26-2.

That's from the town of Dartmouth Parks and Recreation to repave over an existing road that is approximately 3,477 ft in length. It's within a 100 ft buffer zone to a bordering vegetated wetland and within land subject to coastal storm flowage. It's land described as map 90 lot 10. It's otherwise known as 231 Smith Neck Road.

Um that is the access road to Roundill Beach and uh Eduardo or Jennifer staff's recommendations on this request.

I can jump in on this one. So um we worked with both the recreation director and um DPW engineering to discuss different options. Um I think the initial discussion with Mark was for um about 600 linear feet. Uh that was heavily damaged from annual spring flooding that occurs. Um a lot of lot of potholes become pretty unusable and unsafe for or a liability for the town to continue let cars pass through that

area. Um and then we were asked to increase the the scope of the project kind of um intermittently. So that's what the ad says. We were asked to do that just prior to the meeting um last week and um after some additional discussion I I think we all came to the conclusion it just makes more sense to stick with that initial 600 um as a temporary holdover for the next couple

years while a more permanent solution is investigated for the larger extent of the roadway. Um that's probably going to require some some pretty significant structural work to to get that roadway in good shape for the next few decades.

Um and then they did ask to add on about a 100 linear feet um that is near the wooden if you know the the area near the wooden um timber culvert that's got quite a bit of subsidance and so um they just need to do a little bit of work there so that there's not more damage occurring to that culvert um in the interim.

Okay. So the recommendation would be to um issue a negative determination in the two areas mentioned the approximately 600 linear feet and the 100 linear feet.

Yeah. So I have down um a positive 2B which is basically that were we didn't review the wetland delineation because it's not it wasn't necessarily a flagged edge. We just know the resource areas are right there on both sides of the roadway. Um and then a negative 2 3 and six.

So positive 2B negative 2 3 and six.

Mhm.

Okay. That's the recommendation of staff. Does any uh commissioner have any questions?

Don't see any. So, at this juncture, I'll entertain a motion to issue um on the application of the town of Dartmouth Parks and Recreation a positive uh 2B and a negative 2, 3, and six on the limited 600 ft linear feet and approximately 100 linear feet um restoration of the driving surface.

So moved.

Second.

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

James, yes.

Megan, yes.

Richard, yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

That concludes our field trip reports.

We're going now to our public hearings.

And the first is a continued public hearing, D file 15-28-21, NOI 2611.

That's an after-the-act notice of intent uh from Ronan Drury proposing to install new updated central vacuum stalls, payment kiosks, sight paving and buffer zone restoration work within the 200 ft riverfront area and the 100 ft buffer zone to an inland bank. The applicable regulations on this matter are 310 CMR 10.02, 02 10.54 10.58 and section 360-2 of the town of Dartmouth bylaw. [snorts] The land is

described as map 167 lot 101 is otherwise known as 271 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. Liz, yes.

Megan, yes.

James, yes.

Richard, yes. My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

And someone here this evening on behalf of the applicant.

Yes, I'm here. Can you hear me?

I can hear you just fine. Can't see you, but I can hear you.

It won't let me turn my video on for some reason.

Oh, okay.

H says host has stopped it. So, I do apologize.

Yeah, I didn't stop you. But uh DCTV, if I may, I've just given you um co-host permissions, so you should be able to now. Excellent.

You can also share your screen if you'd like to share documents.

I will do my best. Uh my name is Kevin Davis. I'm a PE with ET engineering. Um nice to meet you all. This is my first time uh meeting commission. Um so I'm here on behalf of Mr. Droy uh for 271 State Road. Let me try to share my screen here.

You have lovely background. It certainly isn't here.

Thank you. No, it's not. Uh,

all right. I'm on one screen, so I do apologize. I'm not a Yeah. What came up is all of us and then There it is. Now it's bigger. Yep. But somehow or other, I'm still on there. I don't know why.

Yeah. Let me see if I can move you out of here.

Yeah. Erase me.

All right. Can everybody see my screen?

Yep. Yes, I can.

Okay. So, the site is uh defined on assessor map 167, lot 101. It is approximately uh 65,786 square ft. Uh my understanding is this has been before the commission before uh so I will not try to go in uh exertion for the detail but essentially is an existing car wash um off the state road that my client is looking to basically refurbish uh add new vacuum cleaner clean cleaners spruce up the area and

modernize it. Um, after the prior meeting with staff, uh, we came up with this revised mitigation plan in order to restore the riverfront area.

Hide this here. Um, which Mr. Ken Thompson from Five Wetlands uh, provided for us. Um, essentially uh, plantings on the western and southern and northern parts. Um, this includes American holly and red cedars. The, um, Mr. Forez uh met with us and went over some some of the requirements. Um and since then I believe uh Miss Miller contacted um Azu Dairo uh who's also a PE with the same

company I'm at and discussed some additional uh changes that she wanted to see. Um we do plan to to meet with staff. Um but my hope is that I can answer any questions by the commissions uh and talk about this project in any way that you have questions uh so that we can come to um to a finalization of this project so my client can finish the site and uh have

this area spruced up for the town.

U appreciate that. U Jennifer or Eduardo, I would welcome staff's comments. I know we were given comments in writing, but it's always been our practice to also have them verbalized at the meeting.

Sure. [clears throat] Um, so I I'll start and then Eduardo, if you want to add anything, please jump in. Um so my understanding is obviously I wasn't here for the first presentation and for the initial site visit was that this project was initially presented um to the building department as some simple vacuum replacement um without any um pavement disturbance. Um that hasn't been the case. The asphalt was disturbed

in order to install the vacuums. Um and then some vegetation was cut along the stream itself. Um and because of the cutting of vegetation along the stream, we have the planting schedule that you see before you all tonight on this revised plan. Um the the additional issue is that some of the grass and or vegetated islands were removed um and other areas throughout the site. Um and

that increases the impervious cover. Um so as Kevin just you know alluded to I did talk with the zoo earlier today um about those concerns that's both a conservation concern because of storm water but also um because it's in an aquifer protection zone that falls into um zoning and as a concern for DPW on the storm under the storm water bylaw as well. Um, so we we've gone over that and

then as Kevin said, the agreement is that once a zoo returns from his trip, we'll schedule some time to um discuss with the different departments involved and see what kind of resolution we can all come up with. But um you'll either you'll either need to put the vegetated areas back to restore them or um to offer infiltration elsewhere on the site to compensate um for that increased

impervious cover. There's really not a way around that.

Thank you very much. Eduardo, do you have anything you would like to add to that?

Um the only thing I I really have to add is that um the planting plan uh displayed uh today is it was actually there's an updated one um that features I believe three red cedars over on the western side uh of the plan um a little past the little the curve. Um, I just wanted to let the commission to to to know that.

Well, yeah, it sounds like they're going to they're going to have to have a continuence on this, but more importantly, there's going to be a revised plan as a result of the comments that have been made. So, I'm sure that the new I would hope that the new u planting plan is incorporated in the revised plan. Um, and I guess my co my question, um, and I'll put this to staff. Um, I understand why we're

there's a need for uh a revised plan and a continuation, but in terms of the planting plan, assuming, and I know it's a big assumption, there is not a restoration of the planting islands nor uh additional infiltration. Is that planting plan sufficient for for what they're showing or are there other things you want them to know about tonight?

Um I think the planting plan is what was agreed upon to compensate for the vegetation that was cut and removed along the stream um the river itself.

But the it does not mitigate the vegetation that was removed in the islands um throughout the site. That's that's a significant increase in imperous cover with asphalting or putting rock down in those islands. then that'll need to be calculated and and either infiltrated or replaced.

And uh just so you Kevin, you know the Yes, sir.

that that there there is we do take that very seriously obviously. So um it's not something that we're well not something I'm inclined to wave. So, you'll have to make a decision of whether you're going to restore those vegetated islands as they were prior to the non-permissive um removal or if you're going to do additional um storm water.

We have to have a very very good detail on what you plan to do with the calculations so that we'll be able to determine if it's sufficient.

Yeah. And that's one of the things we plan to do is sit down with Miss Miller and kind of go over some ideas um that we might have on how we can accomplish something along those lines.

Yeah, I think it's best if you folks come up with what you think is the solution and allow um our staff to review it and then make comment, but um they're not going to design it, right?

No, that's our job.

Yep. Exactly. We'll design it, but with with um at least some conversation with staff so that we're we're going about it in the right direction.

I appreciate that. But it's always a good idea when you come in to talk with staff, you've already noodled around and come up with some ideas so they can comment on your new ideas, not the old ones we know need to be refined. That's that's my comment because I think it really isn't a productive use of your time or our staff's time if you don't do that.

Understood.

Yeah, I think it'll be important to have um the building department like the building commissioner or his representative involved as well for the zoning aspect.

Um and then DPW engineering too.

That's an excellent idea. So no, normally what what would have happened on something like this, they probably would have asked for a reviewers meeting and all the interested parties in the town would have been at that meeting.

you would have gotten comments from all the different departments. You would have known what to do before you did it.

I don't mean you personally. So I I understand.

So you know a step or two was skipped and now it's slowing the whole thing down past what it would have been had all those steps been taken. So the city of Yeah, city of Ton has a similar process with the reviewers meeting. So I'm very familiar with those. Um so yeah, I'll I'll reach out to staff. We'll we'll have something put together. We'll we'll sit down and and make sure everything is

acceptable to them before we come before the commission.

So, how much time do you think you're going to need for all of that?

Um talking with Mr. uh he asked for a month to be sure that we have all the designs ready for Miss Miller.

So, that would be our second meeting in June.

Um our first meeting is the 9th. So, it' be two weeks after the 9th. What does anyone have a calendar? I don't.

23rd.

Okay. So, it's June 23rd.

Is that acceptable, Kevin?

Yes, sir.

Okay.

I'm just writing it down now so I don't get Yeah, that's a good idea. And any revised plans, any revised submittals have to be in our office by noon time Thursday before the meeting or else Okay. [clears throat] We can't close the public hearing.

Understood, sir.

So, you're under even a shorter time frame. [snorts] Um, does any commissioner have any questions they want to ask?

I don't see any. By the way, Donald, welcome on board. I see you're here.

Yes, thank you.

So, um, an additional commissioner has joined the meeting. Um, is there anyone in the audience this evening that wants to be heard on this application with the understanding we're likely to continue this until June 23rd, at which time you'd free to speak at that meeting as well.

I don't see anyone raising their hand or making any indication they want to speak. So, uh, commissioners, I'll entertain a motion to continue, uh, this public hearing, D file 15-28-21 until our second meeting in June, June 23, 2026 at 7 p.m.

So moved.

Second.

We have a seconded motion on the floor.

Roll call vote.

Liz, yes.

Megan, yes.

Richard, yes.

James, yes.

Donald, yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

Thank you all.

Thank you. I'm going to have to recuse myself from the second public hearing.

and Liz has graciously agreed to chair the second public hearing. So, I am not I am not uh leaving the meeting. I'm just turning off my video and audio.

Thank you, Mike. Uh DCTV, can you enable my camera, please?

Hi, Liz. Yes, you should have co-host permissions.

Thank you very much. Um all right, so moving on to our second public hearing for the night. This is public hearing D file 15-2825 notice of intent 26-16 on the notice of intent from Morgan Blum care of Brandon Fenuf for the construction of a commercial automobile dealership within the 100 foot buffer zone of a boring vegetated wetland BVW.

Uh the applicable regulations are 310 CMR 10.02 2 10.55 and section 360-2 of the bylaw. It's on land described as map 531 174 lot 2/24 or zero state road. I'll entertain a motion to wave the reading.

Yes. So moved.

Second.

And roll call vote. Megan.

Yes.

James.

Yep.

Richard. Yes.

And Donald, yes.

That motion passes unanimously.

Um, is there anybody here tonight that would like to speak? Uh, yes, there is, Madam Chair.

Go right ahead.

Thank you, Madam Chair, and Conservation Commissioner Magnus. This is Brandon Fann with Deco System Solutions. Um, and I have a a new president. I I am doing the meeting from an airplane because they they can do that now.

Wow.

Yeah. I can say that I'm now the proud father of uh two college graduates. Uh and we're getting back from what who knows might be our last family vacation and uh so uh it is what it is. So uh doing doing the uh doing the meeting from here.

Well, we're thrilled to have you.

Technology is a blessing.

Sure is. Okay. All right. So, um I also have with me tonight, uh David P pot Potter, professional engineer from uh Park Corporation, uh who is going to be explaining more of the nuts and the bolts of the uh you know the design and I am basically going to go through the history of this site and also you know some of the environmental factors going on here. Uh, so I've been involved with this property

since 2017. This has been a very long road to get to where we are tonight. Um, started off with Ann and Hope and and now uh we are proposing an Audi Audi and a Volkswagen dealership. Uh, you know, it took a long time to figure out what we're going to do to the land, but we started with uh a couple of ANRADs back in about 2020.

So, yeah, there we go. David is uh now sharing uh some site plans of the site so you can see what it looks like. But there are two properties. There's a lot two which is the large property and lot 24.

Um lot two has frontage on Route 6 State Road and lot 24 has frontage on Ellswick Street.

Um okay.

So lot two is the large lot. It goes all the way back past the dead end of Elswick Street, which is over 1,000 ft, which is where most of the the work is going to take place.

and we then had it uh both of those ENRADs uh extended and they're they're still valid at the moment.

But it really became a moot point because in the early 20s, I want to say 21 or 22, um, we filed a notice of intent because there are three isolated vegetated wetlands that do not qualify as isolated land subject to flooding under 310 CMR10.

And we proposed to fill those in.

the conservation commission uh agreed that that it would be okay to do so as long as we did at least one to one wetland replication uh which we did and we show that here.

You can see that in this plan David is outlining them right now.

There's areas in purple.

The area in dark green is a BBW and there's an area between Route Six, which is on the right hand side of this picture.

Uh, and that white area is our upland with Audi dealership will eventually be placed. But there are three light green shaded wetland areas that are our IBWS that we received permission in order conditions to fill in as long as we did these what the wetland replication areas.

Uh we did an extension permit in 2024.

Uh those are still valid. In fact, they uh are not only valid, but they've been also been uh extended via the uh the leads apps. So, we still have quite a bit of time to be able to do that work.

Okay.

The reason why we think that those three isolated wetlands exist, uh, and again, this is back when Michael O'Reilly was the agent, but his feeling, knowing the area, was that they were most likely created as discharge uh, from at least one detention basin on the Walmart property, which is at the top of the screen and David just put the arrow and then the W for the Walmart. Excellent.

There's a abrupt break in slope between this property and the Walmart property. So when the detention basin drains like it's supposed to, it gets to the bottom of the slope and at least a portion of it uh seeps out and goes onto our property.

Uh those three wetlands were not like my apologies if you can hear outside uh noises but those three wetlands get a lot of discharge water from that detention basin.

Okay.

Uh and I want to note that these purple areas, the weller replication areas have not been built yet. And we perfectly understand per the special conditions from that order of conditions. And also we expect a special condition uh and this order of conditions if so approved that we have to complete that wetland replication area first before we can break ground.

And anything we'll do will be obviously will show.

Okay.

Um David, could you go to uh the site plan showing the uh the drainage way uh on the north end of the lot? Well, next to Walmart.

Sure. Because one of our fears, I would say fear, a concern rather, is because we know that there's discharge coming from Walmart from the detention basins is that we want to make sure that any future discharge coming from that area gets intercepted before it hits uh the developed areas in the dealership and gets rerouted to the north towards the large BVW.

Okay.

So, this this plan, just so I can just just because we've switched north from up to left a few times here on the plan that I'm showing now, north is up.

Um on the plan we were looking at before, north was to the left. And so the the swale that we proposed and was permitted with the last um the last application is shown at the eastern end of the property. Um you can see the steep topography um on the Walmart property and you can see how it it changes to about a 5% grade flowing from east to west across um across the

subject parcel. And so this swale was proposed along that eastern property line. um apologies, but it's cut between two pages to convey that um that overflow from that basin north and um bring it into that replicated wetland at the um at the the northeast corner of the the BB BVW.

Yeah. Yeah. Thank you, David. And and you'll notice that part of that swale is in the IBW, but again, we we've already received permission to fill that in.

Um, so you know that's that's the view from 10,000 ft.

Um, and at this point I think I'm going to hand it over to David to go through some of the nuts and bolts of uh the design. Um, but I will say uh that as part of the notice of intent application process, we were required to deposit money for uh peer review.

Um I'm presuming for storm water, but uh and as David will tell you, this this project is already in with a planning board for site plan review. Uh and that's ongoing. They have yet to meet with the planning board. So obviously, you know, we don't expect to be approved tonight. Uh not that I don't think he would have anyway, but uh I'll hand it over to David.

Great. Thank you, Brandon. So, just to reorient everyone to the to the drawing that I have on the screen, um we have State Road to the right. Uh North is to the left. Uh the Walmart property is to the east, which is um plan upper up above the lot on the plan. So, Walmart's here. Um we have uh Wallbrook um Street over here. Ellswick Street is further off the page. Um and we have our two

lots. this lot um here and then this second lot that uh contacts has frontage on Ellswick Street here. Um we we're showing lightly in the background those um isolated wetlands. Um I think that'll help orient you as to to the graphic that we just had on the screen with the um the original order of conditions. Um we have one on the east side. The second is is here part part is beneath the

existing building and then the third is um in the the northwest corner of the property underneath our stormwater management system. Um so as as um Brandon mentioned there is a a slope across the property. Uh it's about 5% from the east property line to the west property line. Um all of our runoff uh flows pretty much to the to the west property line um more to the northwest corner. Um we have the total property

itself is just over 42 acres. Uh we're developing um about 9 uh 76 acres of that. So what you see here represents about 9.7 just under 10 acres for our development. We have um a proposed access to the site from State Road. Uh the site's completely undeveloped at this moment. Um we have done clearing which was allowed underneath the the wetland permit that's that's in hand.

the the order conditions that we have in hand. Um but other than that, there's no other really development on this property. Uh we have our um curb cut on State Road. We will be working with Mass DOT to um to to permit that that uh driveway opening. Um and then from here, the site opens up um into parking areas, inventory spaces, and stormwater management areas to support the proposed

dealership. Uh as Brandon mentioned, this will be an Audi Volkswagen dealership. Uh we have a 37,000 uh square foot building uh located in the generally the center of the parcel. Uh we have access on all four sides of the building that'll facilitate access for fire. Um also for for inventory to move around the property. We have um a total of 133 parking 113 parking spaces, excuse me. We're working with the

planning department to reduce the amount of parking spaces needed um per the zoning. I believe zoning required somewhere in the realm of 170 180 spaces. I think it's 177. Um but we're requesting here a reduction. Uh we don't believe all those spaces would be required and we're we're looking to go uh down to 113. Um the the used the spaces used for visitors and staff are generally to the east and to the south.

And then we have um being an auto dealership, we have uh inventory spaces, some inside the building and and some outside the building.

We are uh working to mimic the existing drainage patterns on site. Uh we everything's still going to flow from east to west. Uh we've got about a 5% grade through our parking areas. I know this is tough to read this. Hopefully you have this in your in your packets.

Um we do have uh you know where the building is going to be. Things are level. So, we're cutting a little bit on the east side, filling a bit on the west side. Um, and all that storm water runoff from those impervious surfaces is going to be collected uh by uh catch basins, the storm water management collection system and conveyed via HDP and reinforced concrete piping to our storm water management system which is

concentrated in our northwest corner of our development. Um, our stormwater management system has uh three major cells. We have a sediment for bay. Uh we have our infiltration basin where we're working to uh maximize a potential for infiltration of that storm water runoff.

Um and then we have a detention basin to help manage peak flows from the site.

The um there is an outlet control structure uh where the stormwater runoff will be discharged um in this northwest corner here um and then rejoin with the the wetland complex uh to the northwest.

Um you can see on this plan in green the the current BV BVW. Um in this purple I'll call it purple uh red color we have the replicated wetlands from the the current order of conditions. In orange we have the 25 ft no disturb zone um that extends we've we've taken those lines off of the replicated wetland uh which we felt was appropriate. Um and then in and on the Ellswick Street

property off the the existing island and then the the 100 foot um setback a buffer zone. So in the buffer zone you can see that the development was that's proposed would be um parking mostly inventory parking um we'll have some storm water management systems uh landscape islands um and then our our outfall um and that's the concentration development there.

Um as we we did prepare a full stormwater management report. Uh the we um submitted that to the town. Um it was reviewed by the the planning department and the DPW. We recently received comments. Um and we prepared uh revised plans. Uh the revisions were I'll say generally minor in nature. They didn't change the the um the general composition of what we're proposing in the buffer zone. Um we we have our

plans. They're either going to be submitted. They either were submitted today or they will be submitted tomorrow. Um but we'd be happy to submit those to the conservation commission. So you can see the changes that came about from the review by by those departments.

Um we just a couple of minor points. We have new utilities. Those uh to serve the site service building. Those are all coming from State Road. Uh we've got fire, uh domestic water, gas, uh electric, and sanitary sewer all coming off the the southwest uh corner of the property. The property is served by public utilities, so no septic or um or wells here. Um and all that work would be outside of the um outside of the

buffer zone.

And so with that, I I brain, I don't know if you have anything else to add to that, but um you know, I I thought it was a pretty good uh summary of of the proposed development.

Um so yeah, all work at least 25 ft away from the BVW including the replication areas uh with the replication areas in the shaded red. Um there is a second well in replication area to the um to the east which is behind Walmart.

Yes. And I I can put that on the screen.

So it's actually to the to the northeast of our development, right?

Yeah. And it was um it'll be accessed through Walmart. So you see here I've got the plan up that shows north is to the left again. Same orientation as our proposed development plan. You can see Walmart in with the big W here through there. Walmart parking lot. There's a there's an access easement that would allow us to um to get to this area here.

Um this is another area where we're going to be replicating wetlands to um to meet the the replication ratio that was that was part of that permit. So this work would be part of this project as well.

All right.

Right. and and the uh the material that we take out of the upland areas in order to create uh the well replication areas can be used as green fill uh for uh the filling of the IBWS.

And that's it.

Okay.

Thank you both gentlemen for the presentation. It was thorough. Um, at this time I'd like to hear comments from Jennifer and Eduardo.

Thank you. Um, I think one of the first items really for the commission to consider is um, as Brandon kind of alluded to earlier, they did pay for um, a storm water review. Um much much like Mike um the our um typical peer review storm water peer reviewer um Gus Reposo of Reposo Engineering um had to recuse himself because he was involved with this site previously. Um I actually uh in talking

with Brandon I guess he brought Brandon into the project. So very full circle.

Um but that means Gus can't be our peer reviewer for this. So, um, we do have comments from engineering, but we typically on projects of this scale still do a third party review. Um, we've collected the fees for that. And, um, I just want to get a consensus from the commission since I'm coming into this, um, kind of brand new with a week here.

Um, if this has occurred in the past and if you typically go with a different third party reviewer, um, certainly have some other companies in mind that we could use for this project. But I just want to know what direction the commission would like to go with that.

I think uh in the past we've definitely um accepted the third party peer review and it would be in our best interest to move forward with your uh vendors that you've see out for that.

Okay.

Um, and then, um, as far as the other comments, um, I guess I I guess a couple questions for Brandon and David is you mentioned the reduction potentially that you're seeking for, um, parking spaces.

If that reduction is approved, would that pull back the parking that extends into the buffer zone?

It does not. No. So, the the parking requirement is um the 177 spaces um shown here and um in our zoning table. And there's um a we have a a buildout plan that was included with our planning submission. Oops, didn't work the way I wanted. And it has um additional parking spaces shown here.

What we're required to to show the the planning department is that we're able to if for some reason the they and they've been supportive the the department has been supportive of this reduction in parking spaces. Um we have not yet met with the the planning board.

Our first hearing will be June 1st. Um but the the department has been supportive of this reduction because the 177 spaces just don't don't uh the owner does not believe that those are needed given the amount of employees that they have and the number of visitors that they would they would um receive. But we are required with that reduction. So the zoning code allows for this reduction

but we have to show that that that space is still available in a developable portion of the property in which which this is the area we've identified. Um, and in the background I can find that plan to show you that was part of what we had submitted to the to the planning department. Um, so it wouldn't change this plan.

Okay. I I think it's just knowing whether or not that would change the footprint was kind of what I was looking for.

Yeah. Longer explanation than you needed, but No, no, no. That's okay. I appreciate it. It's helpful. I just don't want you to feel like you have to bring the plan up. Um, and then the other question was, has this already gone before um like the permitting departments through like a technical review?

I Yes, it has. It has gone through the Dartmouth online um permit portal.

No, but we like So we have an in-person um usually once a month uh all the permitting department heads through the planning department are brought together to go over pending projects um of this scale.

Yes. And Okay.

Okay. So, this has gone through if I may. Yeah, if I may. Mike McVey from Marky and Walsh in New Bedford. Um, good evening, commissioners. These guys have done a fantastic job. I really don't have anything really to add. I've just assisted the applicant through the the uh single piece of zoning relief we needed and then um on Monday night before the planning board like David mentioned. But um if your question is

the [clears throat] pre-development sort of um opportunity that the town affords applicants that was taken advantage of.

Yes.

Okay. All right. That's helpful to know too. Um and then so just a few comments from the staff perspective and I know we're you know still working through the process and we obviously have a third party peerreview that we're going to be starting as well. Um but as as previously noted the replication area remains outstanding. One aspect of that is um you know Brandon had mentioned

earlier that we certainly expect to have it be a condition of development of the rest of the site to um complete the replication. I just want to clarify that typically with replication and and I know Brandon knows this so I'm not trying to split hairs but we're looking at like a two-year um period where we would receive updated reports on the success of the planting area before we would consider it

completed. Um so I just want to clarify that really we're looking for it to be installed and then the monitoring to go from there. I'm guessing that you're not wanting to wait two two years to get break ground on development of the site.

Oh yeah, correct. And confirmed obviously. Yes, that you'll be getting yearly updates with uh you know coming back for eventually for certificate of compliance after at least 2 years on the uh order conditions for the well and replication area. But the the requirements for the construction of the replication area, the timing of the the construction, uh notifications, pre-construction meetings, everything

associated for that is outlined in the special conditions for uh the replication area from from 2021 or two.

Um so that you'll you'll definitely be getting notified for that. and and one of the conditions in that order was that um that this replication must be completed before any future development breaks ground. It it it's not that um a conservation commission couldn't hear a new application and or even approve an application. It's just that we couldn't break ground until the replication area

uh at least was initially complete as in the initial construction you know the digging out the placement of of uh wetland soil and the planting of the plants.

Okay.

Um and then if you could go to the the drainage plan um Dave.

So there the erosion controls right now show as behind the wetland replication areas. Um I I know for the initial construction or excavation for the wetland replication areas that makes sense to me.

Yeah.

Um but we also need to show erosion controls for the construction. So maybe as like a phase one, phase two or something along those lines just to differentiate between and obviously we don't want the erosion controls for developing the site to be in the way of the wetland replication work but um just a little bit of clarification maybe at the 25 um as the limit of disturbance.

Yeah, we could we can show that easily on our plans. show a a phase two erosion control line assuming anticipating that the replication would be completed first and then um new new um new sil fence or compost filter sock would be placed um we'll try to see if it all would fit at the 25 ft no touch there might be a few areas where it goes within it I think this southfall here is

one spot where we have some of that work uh within that 25 foot zone okay and then So I guess that leads to my my next question just quickly. My preference would be for compost filter sock where the grades dictate with silk fence. Otherwise just compost filter sock because it outlasts the straw waddles significantly on sites like this.

Okay. Um so um yeah, one of my questions is there's work shown include grading and storm water infrastructure shown within that 25 ft no disturb. Um so just clarification on that. Um and then it doesn't necessarily need to be answered tonight, but just something to for the commission to um pay attention to. Um and then the the last item um which is more at the top of the site near Walmart. Um

there's proposed grading shown which would seem to me that you're going to end up with drainage flowing towards that um 25 ft no disturb buffer down towards I guess the edge of the building of I'm sorry if you work your way left.

Um yeah. across there's there'll be this is I'm tracing the bottom of the swale here.

Yeah.

Um and then as you get to the end of the swale Y there's grading downhill.

Right.

Right. Yes. As it the grading is um it's designed to get that storm water runoff through that replicated wetland. You know, we we thought that would help with the success of that replicated wetland by making sure water was getting to it.

Um, and so there's the swale, uh, there's a top of a burm I'm just dashing out here quickly, um, to keep that water flowing to the to the north to that wetland. And then there would be on-site runoff from this area here, and that'll that's included in our drainage calculations. that's factored into what we have just run off from this um you know seated area over here between that swale and the the edge of pavement.

Okay. And then how about as you get to the back end of the edge of pavement kind of that north um west corner the northwest corner.

Yeah. So all that drainage that all that grading is to me um shows that it's So is all of that going to be captured into catch basins in the asphalt and then sent to the other side?

Yes, that's correct. All that's factored to be caught picked up by the uh storm water management system and um shown in a little bit better detail on these plans here, but where that runoff is coming down the hill and then we're creating a swale before the edge of pavement to intercept that gra that water that runoff and convey it to a catch basin here. We also have a subdrain in that swale to pick up that runoff.

Okay. I'm just concerned about the volumes there, but I'll leave that to the peer reviewer and and also the volumes going to that newly replicated wetland area. Again, I'll leave that to the peer reviewer, but Sure.

I just want to make sure we're um we're not increasing the pre and post conditions of different parts of the site, right? Yeah, we'll we'll take a look at it, too. um you know as far as the the drainage calculations um work we do have a decrease in the area going to the um we looked at you know the runoff going to this abuing property here we do have a a reduction to that property which we

were we think the abuters would be happy to see um and we have an overall reduction in peak falloff rate leaving the site at our main design point which is which is here um at the at the outfall You're cut.

Okay. And then I guess a question for the commission would be in terms of that 25 foot no disturb. My understanding in talking with Mark is that there's some variability in that. Um is that something typically on a site like this where you would allow some of the grading and storm water structures in that 25 foot noticer or would you look to have them pulled back?

That's a difficult call. Um, I think it's nuanced and I think we can take a look at it. Um, I'd like to perhaps provide feedback on that after the peer reviewer has been hired and taken a look at the study, but I I think um there's certainly reason for consideration to allow it and and our and I appreciate that that there we feel the reason is this the best place to discharge the storm water

from the site back to the wetland.

Um and that's where that's what the intent is. We have our main discharge which would be a pipe outfall which has a um a flood end section and a rip wrap level spreader to minimize the potential for erosion. And then uh we have a a rip rip wrap um spillway which we do not overflow I believe in a 100redyear storm. So it's it's just in case something clogs or there's a there's a

need to discharge from the basin. So it won't be regularly water will not be regularly discharged into the replication area from this. But it for us it seemed to make sense that we were doing this work to keep the storm water discharges up to the wetland and um away from the adjacent properties down here.

Okay. Um I yeah I guess it's something to discuss further once the peer review is underway and we have a better sense of their feedback as to whether that design could be shifted slightly to pull it further away. Just not super comfortable with having storm water infrastructure right at the edge of a wetland even if it's a replicated wetland.

Um, but it sounds like it's something the commission may be willing to consider. So, um, I think more to come on that aspect.

Great.

Um, so at this time, given the comments that you've mentioned, um, well, first let me let me reach out to the commissioners. Do the commissioners have any questions on this application?

I'm not seeing any at this time. Is there anyone from the audience that would like to be heard on this application?

I'm also not seeing anyone.

So, at this point, I will entertain a motion to close the public hearing.

So, moved with the peer review still going. We're just continuing, right?

That'll be forthcoming in a in a minute here. Yes, absolutely. We're just going to close the public hearing first and then I will uh read the motion to continue. Uh can I get a roll call vote, please, to close the public hearing? Uh, this will be Megan.

I'm sorry. Can I ask a quick question?

Of course.

Being being being then the the new person on the meeting.

Yeah.

Um, so typically each public hearing is closed out because from my perspective, my history, it would be you would only close the public hearing once you're done with like all testimony in if you're continuing or you don't close it.

You're well probably correct. So, I'm going to follow your lead on that since I'm filling in for Mike.

Okay.

Um, so at this point, I'm going to reverse course here and I'm going to entertain a motion to continue.

Okay, let me go up here.

Public hearing D file 15-2825 for the notice of intent 26-16 to the next meeting which will be June 9th to allow for a third-party storm water review um as well as to receive any applicable comments from the planning board. Do I have a motion on the floor? Uh, Madame Chair, if I could, do you think June 9th is enough time?

I suppose that's more of a question for the applicants. Um, from the engineers perspective, do you feel that's enough time? And also, Jennifer, your feedback as to whether we are able to secure a third party review for storm water before June 9th.

So, I I think this peer review can certainly be initiated before June 9th.

um like a contract initiated, but I doubt they'll be completed by then. Um and even then, I would assume that R is going to want some time to review those comments and hopefully respond. Um so I would recommend the 23rd.

Okay.

Um but I would certainly defer to Brandon and David as well.

I think because of the peer review, we'd be okay with that. We have our meeting with the playing uh board on the 1st of June. So, um, if anything changes the plans, we could we can keep the we'll keep the commission and in um in the no on that, but we're okay with the 23rd of June.

Okay. Thank you for the guidance here.

Let me revise my statement. Um, I will entertain a motion to continue public hearing D file 15-2825 to our ne to uh the June 23rd meeting to allow for the storm water third party review and any applicable comments coming forthcoming from that. Do I have a motion?

So moved. Second.

Okay. Roll call vote. Megan, yes.

Donald, yes.

James, yes.

Rich, yes.

That motion P and my vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

And now I will entertain a motion to close the public hearing.

So moved. Second.

Okay. Roll call vote. Megan.

Yes. So I'm sorry. Point of order. I I don't think we would close it. We just continued it and we'll just leave it open. Um, okay.

So, for the next meeting, the 23rd, we will leave it open. Uh, Mike, you can come on back and handle public hearing number three.

All righty.

Thank you everyone.

Thank you for this unique opportunity.

I was I was a little kurfuffle with everybody around me, but it came out all right.

You're the most favorite passenger now.

Yeah, I know.

You did fine. And we couldn't hear any of it, so you're all right. Good.

Thank you. Have a good night.

Good night.

Have a good night.

Um, we're moving on now to our final public hearing, uh, which is public hearing DP file 15-2826, NOI uh 26:15.

It's the notice of intent from Ray Young, care of Tom Schultz, uh, for the construction of an above ground infiltration system with associated grading and chainlink fence within the 100 ft buffer zone of a bordering vegetated wetland BVW uh, with an interior intermittent stream. The regulations involved are 310 CMR 10.02, 02 10.53 10.55 and section 360-2 of the town of Dartmouth bylaw. The [clears throat]

proposed storm water management systems associated with the construction of a new plus or minus 5,785 square foot convenience store, parking lot, gas station, landscaping, and additional storm water features not within a jurisdictional resource area, including buffer zone. It's [snorts] on land described as map 63, lot 12. It's otherwise known as 411 Forner Road. I'll entertain a motion to wave the reading.

So moved.

Second.

Have a seconded motion. Megan, yes.

Liz, yes.

Donald, yes.

James, yes.

Richard, yes.

My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

Is there someone here this evening on behalf of the applicants?

Um, Mr. Chairman, there's not anybody here for the meeting tonight because they have already requested a continuence through uh to the meeting on June 23rd. Um and that was through their consultant uh with Goddard Consulting through Civil Design Group.

Yes, I I did see that email. I just didn't know if there would be um they would show up just to ask for that continuence because it's always a possibility it'd be denied. Um but in any event, nobody's here and there is a request made by the applicant. Um having reviewed the correspondence, um I I feel that it's appropriate. But before uh we enter into discussion, I just want to

know if anybody here this evening wishes to speak on this matter with the knowledge that we're now going to entertain a motion to continue at the applicant's request.

I don't see anybody. So, uh, commissioners, I think it's a reasonable request and as far as I know, it's a first request for continuence. So, we're generally liberal on those anyway. But, um, any discussion?

I don't see any. So, I'll entertain a motion to continue uh public hearing on D file 15-2826 at the applicant's request until uh June 23, 2026 at 7 p.m.

So moved.

Second.

We have a seconded motion on the floor.

Roll call vote. Liz, yes.

Megan, yes.

James, yes.

Richard, yes.

Donald, yes. My vote is yes. That motion passes unanimously.

That concludes our public hearings.

We'll move on to our items for discussion. And there are two discussion items. One is Smith Neck Road Matters Lane.

The other is the NRT municipal certification letter for Little River Farm Restriction.

Um either Eduardo or Jennifer, do you want to present those?

Um I can I can take over. um for the discussion items, if Jennifer wants to add anything, uh she's more than welcome to if I forget anything.

Um so for discussion item number A, uh we received a request from a professor over at um UMass Dartmouth in regards to an RDA that was filed um I believe back in 2024.

Um, and so this RDA was for uh for some Spartina alterna uh plugs uh that they were going to um do some research on uh in a salt marsh. And so they've done they've done they've done the work. However, uh this professor has a new uh student who wants to continue the research uh with some new um salt marsh uh vegetation plugs in different locations. and she wanted to ask the

commission if um the scope of the RDA um aligns uh with this current new project with these new location new locations but within the same map and lot number uh parcel or if it would require a uh new RDA.

And so I'm bringing this to the commission to uh make a decision based off that.

Um I'll be candid. I haven't reviewed the old RDA, so I need to read that before I can make that decision. Eduardo, um it depends how specifically uh it was delineated as to what was being done, what plugs were going to be installed, and where. And if it was that specific, then it'd be a request. I would say you'd need to make a request for a new RDA or at best an amendment to the existing RDA.

Yeah. What's that?

Okay. I can um I can give you that uh I can send you all the information on the RDA and we can take it from there.

Yeah. I just want to make sure because, you know, I I I assume that what's being proposed is in keeping with what had previously been authorized, but without reviewing it, I'd be shooting in the dark to say yes, go right ahead. It's a continuation of that RDA. Mhm.

Can I can I offer just a little bit of insight and then also let you know that um the person making the request um is also on the Zoom um meeting right now and so they might be able to offer some additional insight beyond what I see here. Just kind of reviewing. I also wanted to take a look at the original RDA um and see um how specific it was and um the work description is fairly

specific. Um and and understanding that that work was already completed. Um I would say that in terms of is this additional work that wasn't in the initial work description? Um yes it is.

But I do feel like in it being additional trans sex or additional Spartina um research study that it is in keeping with the like the spirit of of the submittal in the initial request um and and is still looking at possibilities for restoration in in our area um with Salt Marsh and is an important piece of work. I would hate to delay it further and and I think there is some some latitude with that if

the commission is willing to consider it but I also would love to hear from Miss Libri as well if you'll entertain that Mr. Chairman.

I certainly will.

Miss Lee, you have the floor if you're able to.

Hello. Yes, I'm here. Um yeah, thank you very much for um uh you know allowing this discussion of this project. Um I I I understand that the initial RDA was is quite specific and in those locations of those Bartina alternative floor transplant plots. Um that was work completed by my master student John Clark. um did a great job but his his research of course uh there were additional questions that

came from it. Um may not know nonquit Salt Marsh now has 29 about 29 acres of unveated unveated mudflat that has been persistent since uh the culvert was widened in 2013. Um, so this work moving forward with my new PhD student is trying to identify what areas of that persistent mud flat could potentially be restored with this Spartina. Um so yeah, as as was said previously by uh uh um uh conservation

director Jennifer Miller, um this yes is very much uh you know with within the spirit of that initial RDA and the initial RDA um especially went ahead because that one had required some movement of of sediment of that salt marsh sediment and This um is simply the uh transplanting of those spartina plugs along that mudflat gradient.

Okay, I appreciate very much the explanation of why uh this request is being made and uh the importance of it. uh what I'm trying to and I won't be able to answer that question till I've read the old RDA, but it sounds like it might be a little too specific to just fold this over into it. Um and say it's a continuation and that previous approval was all you needed. Um, but let me read

it before I make a final decision because I think it would be, you know, disrespectful to you and certainly to my role as a commissioner to make an assumption when I can easily read the old RDA myself and not have to guess.

Sure.

U, but I understand now uh and actually makes a great deal of sense to to continue the study. But just from a procedural standpoint, the question would be uh do you need any new approvals?

My guess is you might. And if you do, I mean, I I think you've seen the commission's approval, if you will, of that of that type of study before. I don't think that the reason for the approval changes but we may need a intervening process.

Okay.

Great.

And I I could you know we could do it for the next meeting which is only in two weeks time. Does that follow up your ability to conduct the study?

[snorts] Yes. Yep. Um yeah that that would be just fine.

Okay. Because I think Eduardo, if you could circulate that RDA by emails to the commissioners, I mean, we'll be able to read it and put this on. Uh, in fact, what we probably could do is read it and get back to Jennifer or Eduardo with our comments. And if it looks like our comments are genuinely going to require a filing, then you might want to get started with it.

Okay. Yeah, that would be fantastic.

Okay. Because this is an item for discussion anyway. So, it [clears throat] was just to see what we thought of whether you needed additional approval or not.

Sure. So, but Eduardo did include um the request the the request letter um which is sent in an email and then attached to that was some additional page of background information and then the a portion not the complete but a portion of the original RDA that has the work description in it. And I'm not suggesting that everyone take a look at it right this second um to make a decision, but just if you if going based

on what Mike was suggesting, if um all of you are able to take a look at that and then just weigh on on whether you feel like a new RDA would be required, unfortunately, we can't amend it. Um so we would have to look at submitting a new one.

Correct.

So, I would tell you upfront. I'll I'll take a look at it as soon as I get the full RDA and I'll [clears throat] get back to you the same day, Eduardo.

I can send that tomorrow morning. Uh, Mr. Chairman, very good. I'll be I'll look at it tomorrow and get back to you tomorrow with my with my comments. Okay. I won't speak for every commissioner on that, but my comments and then other commissioners, please try to get back to Eduardo as quickly as you can so that he can let u Miss Lee know um what the sentiment of the commission is.

Thank you very much.

You're very welcome. A very clear explanation as to why you want to do it and how important it is. So, I appreciate I do appreciate the u the effort that's being made by your student and uh I for one think it's a good idea, but I want to do it right.

I understand. Thank you.

You're welcome.

Can I ask one additional question? I'm sorry.

Yes, go right ahead.

Is there is there a time frame for the planting um or like an ideal window that you're looking for for the planting of these plugs?

[snorts] Well, I'll let Jennifer go. You go ahead. You can speak. I interrupted you.

Uh, okay. So for for these plugs, ideally we'd um mid June is is really what what we'd be aiming for to have as much of that full uh growing season as much as possible, which would, you know, be maybe a miday to mid to late October. But of course with these plugs um uh because we're we're purchasing as them as 2inch plugs, we have a little bit more um flexibility.

Okay.

Okay.

Thank you.

Oh, you're welcome. Eduardo, you've got the floor again.

Um, so the second item discussion is, uh, so, uh, I believe Nick from DNRT is here. Um, and so he, I believe I sent it to the commission. Um, but he brought in a um, a CR for um, is it, Nick? Is it Little RI River Road?

I don't have the document right in front of me.

That's that's exactly right, Eduardo.

Little River Road.

Thank you. Um and basically um this is this discussion item is basically just for a municipal municipal certification um line essentially. Um, I haven't really dived too into too deep into how the commission does these um or not as I believe this is my first one even um seeing it. Um so Mike, I'll kind of defer to you on how you guys handle these uh because I'm not too sure.

Well, um, in the past, what we've done is reviewed the request and then determined um whether or not um, and now I assume, are you asking for us to approve the restriction or just approve the um, um, designation? I wasn't clear on what that is, but we've given an endorsement saying yes, we think this is worthwhile, but we don't hold are we are we uh going to hold this re I don't know what we're

actually asking here. See, so I don't know what I'm discussing.

I'd be happy to speak to that, Mr.

Chairman. This is um been our practice.

It's not a required part of the CR approval process by the state, but it's something that DNRT has um done on I think every CR at least since I've been director. Um and the purpose really is for the commission to u sign um sign off on this indicating the conservation benefits of the conservation restriction. Uh we're slated to go before the select board later in the month. I think the third week of this

month. And um my hope was to be able to bring to them proof that the conservation commission understands and and agrees with the environmental benefits of protecting this parcel as well.

Yeah, that's what I what kind of thought you were going to ask us to do. We've done that for you in the past. Um but I wasn't sure because I didn't want to make an assumption and then be embarrassed.

Um,

usually Eduardo, what has happened is uh we get the temperature in the room from the commissioners and then in in days gone by either Mike M uh Mike or Mark would draft a letter which I would then review and you know if it were in keeping with the sentiment of the commissioners um approve and then Mike or Mark would sign it. So we didn't require a formal vote, but it was more of a temperature

in the room kind of vote.

Not vote, temperature in the room kind of discussion. So that's how it was done in the past. And I'm trying to think of the one that most recently did. And I think it had to do with that field over by Devals.

That's on an upcoming town meeting that one of I think that's the one we we gave a letter of sort of I called it letters of recommendation but basically saying hey we do think there's important um conservation values attended to the proposal and um I think if you took a look at that it it's got to be under a year it's got to be under probably six months.

So like I think um DNRT has really done the heavy lifting on this for us.

um they have the in the attachment that Eduardo sent the first page um just you know kind of introduces the project to the commission but then the next two pages um are an actual municipal certification letter that's just looking for um a signature um and whether you want would prefer that Mike that you sign it or if you want me to sign it on behalf of the commission um it's it's

all set up and kind of ready for us to to go um if the if it's something the commission would support and and they really review all of the different aspects that would be important to the commission as far as open space, flood plane, um natural landscapes, climate change resiliency, water quality. Um they kind of go through each of those um areas as to to why it would be beneficial to the town from a

conservation perspective.

Okay. Uh Eduardo, which email did that come in? because I I'm looking at all of the materials that were submitted um with the first email including the agenda and I'm not seeing it. Did it come in?

So there was uh I sent the I believe I sent the those two discussion items uh separately and then I sent the agenda and and the documents in another email because the files are so so large that um I couldn't send them all at the same time.

Gotcha.

Mike, Mike, I'm going to forward it to you right now.

No, I I I've actually found it since he said it was in a separate email because I was I I work off of two computers and so when we're having these meetings, I have the agenda and all the plans and docs open and I couldn't find it. But when you said it was a separate email, I found it. Um yeah, so I I have no problems um signing the letter if but I

don't care. Usually Mark did, but I'm happy to sign it. Um, if the commissioners agree, I think it's a worthwhile.

So, I support the CR.

Okay. So, um, if you print the letter out, Eduardo, uh, leave it on the table.

I'll sign it tomorrow.

Okay, sounds good.

Thank you very much, commissioners.

Thank you.

Thank you for saying it was in a separate email, Eduardo. I wouldn't have I had to open up my cell phone to get that one because I running out of real estate on my desk.

All right. Uh before we um adjourn, we have to figure out when and where we're going to have a little farewell for Mark.

May I be heard, Mr. Chairman?

You may be heard, Mr. Melon. Thank you.

Um, Liz, I got all the suggestions that you had made, and I'd like to add another one. Uh, it's Max's. It's up near Gumbos on Route Six.

They have an excellent uh cheeseburger, especially on Thursday night when you can build your own, as the expression goes. It's not the Taj Mahal at all, but they do have a section where I think we could all sit and be uh comfortably put all the tables together and uh wish Mark a fair farewell. Jennifer, we'd love you to come. We'd be honored if that's okay with you.

Yes. Yes, definitely. Just let me know where where and when, which I think it sounds like we're figuring out right now. Uh, and uh, I'm sorry I had to rejoin the meeting. My electricity flickered and that was enough to stop the Zoom. So, I joined back in. But the choice is up to all of you, not me. But I was just throwing that one on the table. If it meets with your approval or

any place meets with your approval, let us know. We'll go to the restaurant and we'll ask them on a certain date if we could have a section a little remote from the maddening crowd and get together and wish Mark a farewell and wish Jennifer welcome. So, um that's my proposal and I'd be glad to do quite a bit of the work on this but I just have to know as Jennifer just said when,

where how etc. etc.

So, I'm usually flexible and if you believe that and I get some water land down south for you.

Yeah, really. I was going to say you're useless. Okay. Uh I I I don't know. Uh to me it probably shouldn't go too far into the future or else it be belated goodbye.

Um so I think it should be u this upcoming month in June.

Agreed. I'm I'm thinking out loud, but um you know, probably it's best to do it on a Tuesday or Wednesday so people don't have to worry about their weekend Monday or Friday with Thursday be included in that, Mike.

Yeah, you can include Thursday.

Okay.

Yeah, but I just think you want to stay away from Monday and Friday.

I agree wholeheartedly.

So, Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday. Why don't we at the end of next meeting, we can take a straw vote and see what's good, the time, and what place you'd like. And I don't know what else to say.

I I mentioned uh Max's maybe because I'm a little selfish, but I think the cheeseburgers could be the best in town, but that's that's your call. Surely not mine. Well, they have excellent cheeseburgers, but I I do think one issue that you raised, which is a good issue, is a place that we might have a little space to ourselves. If you go to most restaurants, um they might put you in the corner of a

room somewhere, but you're in with the rest of their patrons. So, it's a little hard to uh I can go when when the decision is made, a unanimous decision. I think there's a certain area there and I can go to the owner and I tell him what we're interested and in and have him make sure that we're secluded in that little al cove they have. But again, it's your call. You guys pick the place and I'll

do or try my best to do a lot of the leg work for you. How's that?

Sounds good.

Yeah, I think Max's is a good call. And to be honest with you, I don't think I I I frequent the establishment. Um, I don't think it's going to be that busy during the week. Um, but to Rich's point, you know, if if you've got a connection, Rich, with the owner, I'm and I know him as well. I'm sure he's going to be more than accommodating for us.

Yeah, he's a nice guy. Again, the place is not Taj Mahal. I I think, and please, I'll take your input. Uh, it's just the commissioners and not their wives and 16 grandchildren. I think it should just be us, but I'm I'm open for suggestion.

I I agree with you. You know, look, I mean, I'm trying to be as diplomatic as I can, and I think you've already sensed that, you know, and I'm not worried about it uh not being a Tosh Mahal. I've had I've had little uh parties over at 99. Okay?

So, believe it or not, people don't really care too much about where it is unless they're getting married. So, um I think that they they more care about the fact that they're being recognized and that they get a chance to say goodbye to people that they've worked with.

I agree. Uh again, Jennifer, I hope you're in on this.

Yes. Yeah, I would I would love to be there. Um Mark's been very gracious and the time that he's spent with me already and um would love to give him a nice send off.

Okay. So the 99 Maxes or the 99.

Obviously, Eduardo, you're you're certainly uh part of this.

Of course, Eduardo, I was not in excluding you because I you were already part of the proverbial group. You know that.

No, no problem. I I know. I know.

I just wanted to make sure you didn't feel left out. Okay.

No, don't.

You're part You're part of this deal.

All right.

You're part of this a group of uh part of this insanity um control chaos. Uh uh I don't take my not mentioning your name as you being left out. That was not the situation.

And uh yeah. No. So I think I I'm going to tell you right up front. Um I'll let you know uh Richard. I'll send you an email or a text of any dates that are absolutely out. Obviously I don't think we want to do it on our meeting dates.

So let's block those out. Um but um I you know I don't think I'm going to have any conflict. At least not in June. you get into July, right?

It's more dicey for me, but for all of us, Mike. All right. So, next uh next uh meeting or if not before. Um again, I threw Max's out. Liz, you mentioned that you've been there and you know the owner and that.

Yeah, I think that that is the perfect location. I think we should go forward with that.

Okay. And uh just get me the dates and I'll do the leg work. How does that sound?

Well, most importantly, we got to make sure Mark's available. I think maybe uh let's I think maybe somebody needs to reach out to Mark and see when he's ready.

I will call Mark up on the phone. I have a cell phone. All of you do. And we'll find out what dates. Uh mid June, near the end of June. Is that okay, everyone?

Yep.

Okay. and I'll get going on that sometime tomorrow and get back to you all and uh he'll give us a couple of dates. I know Mark has had issues with his not issues, wrong word, has had difficulty with his wife's health and he's been very very attentive of her. Uh but that's who Mark is. And um let's see. All right, so we've narrowed the issue down to Max's. Does anyone else any of the other commissioners present

now have any problem with Max's? If so, tell me.

Well, that's unanimous. Okay.

I eat almost anything.

All right. Um, I'll get a hold of Mark tomorrow and I'll get some dates from him and bump them all across you and away we go. How's that sound?

Perfect. That sounds like a good idea.

Love it.

Okay. Thank you, Jennifer. Welcome to the family, as the expression goes.

Thank you.

The mad house it's control, Jennifer. It's controlled chaos and we do good work.

Perfect.

And just I just want to you just point of clarification. Um in whenever we have a motion to continue, we don't close the public hearing. Um because then we can't take any new information and we have to vote on what's in. So the the last thing we ever do is close the public hearing before we vote. Um it's just so no problem. I know you kind of sprung it on you today.

Um I've I've made a dye otherwise was fine. But yeah, I I was I I was debating whether to buzz in, but I thought, "No, I said I recuse myself."

Uh but Jennifer, Jennifer gave you good advice.

Much appreciated with the guidance there.

You did a fantastic job, Liz. How's that sound?

Hey, thanks, man. Trying my best.

Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. You know what?

We we learn as we go along, but I just want to give you the wise and wherefore.

Once you close the public hearing, ain't nothing else coming in. You got a vote on what's in.

Got it. Thank you for that. I appreciate it.

Okay.

Okay.

Now, I'll entertain a motion to adjurnn.

The most important motion of the evening.

So moved.

Second.

We have a seconded motion on the floor.

We'll do a roll call vote. Richard, I'm here. Yep.

Yeah. I know you're here. Yes. Donald, yes.

I'm in. Yes.

James, yes.

Liz, yes.

Megan, yes. My vote is yes. Passed unanimously.

Good night everyone and thanks for participating. I appreciate it.