2026-08-26 - Conservation Commission

00:05Uh good evening everyone. Uh this is the

00:07August 26, 2026 open meeting of the

00:10Auburn Conservation Commission which is

00:12being operated as a hybrid format under

00:14chapter 22 of the acts of 2022. The

00:18public can join the meeting remotely uh

00:20by telephone and dialing 224-501-3412

00:25and then entering access code

00:28645-782-357

00:31where you can join via computer at uh

00:34meet.go.comconference

00:38room 1.

00:40All supporting materials for tonight's

00:42meeting have been provided to the

00:44commissioners and they're available on

00:45our website. The public is encouraged to

00:47follow along using our posted agenda. My

00:50name is Michael Garland. I'm chairman of

00:51the commission. And before we start, let

00:53me do a roll call of our members. Uh

00:55Michel Kas

00:56>> here.

00:57>> Mark Slammo

00:58>> here.

00:58>> Ricky Arzmi

00:59>> here.

01:00>> Mark Kish

01:00>> here. Uh Nat Bickford

01:02>> here.

01:03>> Uh Megan Langley

01:06>> here.

01:06>> Okay. Megan is joining us remotely. Uh

01:10please note that anyone who wishes to

01:12speak before us tonight uh needs to fill

01:14a signup sheet which is at the end edge

01:17of the u the counter over there. And

01:19this meeting is being recorded by Arburn

01:21Cable Television. So without further

01:24ado, the first matter on our agenda for

01:27tonight is the 7 p.m. public hearing.

01:30Walsh Engineering a notice of intent to

01:32improve drainage with a subservice

01:35gravel wetland at 15 Harts Gravel Road.

01:37Is there a motion to open?

01:40>> Motion open.

01:41>> Is there a second?

01:42>> A second.

01:43>> Is there any discussion? All those in

01:45favor say I.

01:46>> I.

01:46>> I. I.

01:47>> Opposed. It's a vote.

01:49>> Is anyone here on behalf of Walsh

01:50Engineering?

01:54>> Did you hear from from Mike Walsh?

01:55>> Yes. He said he was going to show.

01:57>> Okay.

02:00>> Oh, what?

02:01>> He requested to have us to continue the

02:03hearing today.

02:04>> He requested to continue the hearing.

02:06>> Oh, we did? Yes.

02:07>> Okay. So, I I've been advised that Mr.

02:09Walsh did request to continue the

02:11hearing to September 9th. We don't know.

02:16>> You know, who's gone through planning,

02:17but

02:18>> so when we do this, we will um

02:21we will just take it off our agenda for

02:23this evening and then when we hear from

02:24Walsh Engineering regarding a new date,

02:26we will put it on uh the agenda for

02:29whatever meeting that's going to be.

02:32So, we have a few minutes before our

02:34next public hearing. So, why don't we

02:37review the meeting minutes?

06:16So um

06:19that on page it'll be page five. So 1 2

06:223 4 5 second paragraph

06:26um starting with inch of it should be

06:28rain not rail.

06:31Just a minor typo.

09:11Okay. Aside from that, I have no other

09:13changes.

09:18Um motion to accept the meeting minutes

09:21for August 12th

09:24>> as amended.

09:26>> As amended.

09:27>> Yeah. I mean I made one small change. Is

09:29there a second?

09:34>> Is there a second?

09:35>> Second.

09:36>> Second.

09:36>> Okay.

09:37>> Uh any discussion?

09:40>> All those in favor say I.

09:41>> I.

09:42>> I.

09:42>> I abstain. opposed.

09:46It's a vote. Okay. The next matter on

09:49our agenda for this evening is a 705

09:51public hearing. Matthew Doyle with

09:53Branded Realy Group H LLC for a notice

09:56of intent for a new commercial building

09:59uh at 481 Washington Street. Is there a

10:02motion to open?

10:04>> Motion to open.

10:04>> Is there a second?

10:06>> A second.

10:08>> Any discussion? All those in favor say

10:09I.

10:10>> I.

10:10>> I oppose a vote.

10:12>> Okay. Good evening. Good evening. Hi,

10:14I'm uh Robert Branga of Branded Realy

10:17Group 2. Um I know this is a continued

10:20hearing. I was unable to be at the last

10:22one. Yes, sir.

10:22>> Um I just wanted to give you some

10:24context before our engineer answers some

10:27of the questions that you raised at the

10:28last hearing.

10:29>> Um this property is owned by a petroleum

10:32company. It's generally, as I

10:34understand, a subsidiary of Getty Realy,

10:37which is a publicly traded REIT. Uh big

10:39company. Um, we have the opportunity to

10:44have this site cleaned up. It's a brown

10:46field now. I know it's in the aqua

10:47protection district, which is going to

10:49be of course prime concern to you. Um,

10:51right now there's no dealing, no

10:54management of the wastewater at all. Uh,

10:57we are proposing a state-of-the-art

10:59storm water management system, which I

11:00think you heard about at the last

11:01hearing, and we can get into any more

11:04questions you have about it here. Um,

11:06it's important to to understand the

11:08context. Um this property wasn't for

11:11sale to just anyone. Um we have we were

11:15picked by Getty to do the deal because

11:17we've done these before um in other

11:19parts of the country and in Worcester uh

11:22where we've taken a site

11:24um and I know you got an email earlier

11:26today. I don't know if all of you get a

11:28chance to see it describing the process

11:31um about what they're going to do. So,

11:34what'll happen is once we're able, if we

11:36get our permits within the permitting

11:37period, the 90 days, uh, they will then

11:40come in, then we're committed, we're

11:42locked in, they'll come in, have an LSP

11:45on the site, will then clean up the

11:47site. They will take everything out. If

11:49there's any contaminated soil, that will

11:51go to, they'll uh, back fill it with

11:53construction grade material. And I'm

11:55sure you're all aware, so stop me if I'm

11:57telling you something you already know.

11:58uh tank removal, the fire department has

12:00to supervise the the the they all have

12:03to be manifested. Every stage of their

12:06end of life cycle to where they go is

12:08all documented. Um the uh they do more

12:11testing to make sure that they got all

12:13the contaminated soil and then they'll

12:15backfill the property and then we'll

12:17close on it. There'll be a variety of

12:19deed restrictions on it so that future

12:22use is no further excavation.

12:24uh you can't be used for outdoor

12:26recreation, residential, things like

12:28that because of the prior history of

12:30contamination. And again, um we've done

12:33this with other petroleum companies. So,

12:35they know we're familiar with the

12:37process. There are things we know we

12:39have to do that they know we'll do like

12:41vapor barrier, our our slab foundation,

12:44things like that.

12:45>> Sir, if I can just stop you there. So,

12:47has a 21eight site assessment ever been

12:50done in this property to your knowledge?

12:51>> Yes.

12:52Who did it if you know?

12:54>> Uh Getty had it done

12:55>> when

12:56>> uh they did it. Uh it's a good question.

13:00Uh it was in that email.

13:02>> I didn't and I didn't see the email,

13:03sir. So

13:05>> yeah,

13:05>> I believe they had a spill on the

13:07property. Uh and I believe it was done

13:10after that.

13:13>> And then again, there's going to be a

13:14full report after they do their cleanup.

13:16>> No, I understand that. Um so

13:21and was this reported to D to your

13:23knowledge?

13:23>> Yes. Um they they have a temporary the

13:26most recent thing with DOT

13:29um excuse me D is a temporary out of

13:31service status in 2023 when they

13:35decommission the tanks.

13:36>> It would be helpful to have that.

13:38>> And they pulled out um they pulled out

13:41the dispensers and the canopies in 2024.

13:49And and just so we're clear, as part of

13:51redeveloping the site, you're not going

13:53to put in any uh service um station.

13:56>> No

13:57>> aspect of it. No gas.

13:59>> Just retail. Straight retail and food

14:00service with a drone.

14:01>> Okay. Very good. Please go ahead.

14:08>> Good evening. My name is Alex Wood. I am

14:10a civil engineer with Thompson Lon

14:13Associates. Uh and as uh Mr. Bronco

14:17pointed out here, you know, a general

14:19introduction to the site, um just as a

14:21reminder, um the proposed project

14:24includes a 6,400 ft multi-tenant

14:27building with a Duncan uh and drive-thru

14:31as well as other commercial or retail

14:33uses. And uh just to reiterate uh from

14:36the last meeting that there will be no

14:38imperous area proposed within 50 ft of

14:41the wetland resource area and no

14:43alterations within 25 ft.

14:46Um last time we had discussed the storm

14:50water mitigation strategies given that

14:52the existing site uh just features

14:54runoff that is untreated and so uh the

14:57improvements

14:59uh are for example the roof will be

15:03routed to subsurface infiltration and

15:06the paved areas will be routed to a

15:08system of deep sump hooded catch basins

15:11and water quality units as well as great

15:13inlet water quality units for

15:14pre-treatment prior to infiltration.

15:18Also, as we discussed last time, uh

15:20there will be construction period

15:22erosion and sedimentation controls and

15:25permanent slope stabilizing features

15:27such as um on the easterly side toward

15:29the resource area. There will be

15:31conservation seed mix applied.

15:34Um we just wanted to provide a few

15:36updates based on the specific inquiries

15:38that were uh that were brought up by the

15:40commission at the last meeting. Um so

15:42there was a question raised regarding

15:44the composition of vegetation uh to be

15:47removed on the easterly side. So we have

15:49an answer from the wetland scientist uh

15:52regarding that. And so it says that

15:54vegetation in the upland area consisted

15:56of northern red oak, black cherry, red

15:59maple, nor maple, honeysuckle, green

16:02ash, and garlic mustard. And so as a

16:05reminder, there is a proposed landscape

16:07plan and tree clearing is kept to the

16:10minimum possible for the site layout and

16:13there is uh proposed plantings as part

16:16of the landscape plan. Another concern

16:19that was raised uh Mr. Bronco had

16:21already um touched on this was just

16:22regarding the uh historic use as a gas

16:26station and uh the removal of the gas

16:28pump infrastructure. Uh and so we do

16:30have uh comment from the owner u

16:33regarding that and we had um submitted

16:35that by email uh yesterday uh for the

16:38commission u get that

16:40>> uh to review.

16:41>> I'm not sure that we received that sir.

16:43>> Okay. Uh

16:46yeah I mean we we have a copy here. Um I

16:49believe um I believe that we had emailed

16:52it to you but maybe it got lost or

16:54something like that. So we can look into

16:56that. Um I just think when it when it

16:58comes to the specifics of it though, I

16:59mean Thompson Weston Associates isn't u

17:02part of that remedial process itself. So

17:05that's why I wouldn't want to

17:06paraphrase. We'd rather just point you

17:08directly to the words of uh Lee Mil

17:10Petroleum. So we do have a copy of it of

17:12that with us here um if if we need to go

17:15into that. And then we also are in

17:17receipt of comments from D um with

17:21respect to this notice of intent filing.

17:23and we would be happy to um look at the

17:25D comments um together this evening if

17:28you would like and um also hear any

17:30questions that you may have. Thank you.

17:34>> Do we get DP deep uh comments?

17:37>> I didn't see the D comments.

17:38>> So, apparently you have information that

17:40we have not received.

17:43>> Letter. Um

17:44>> well, I'd rather have it, sir.

17:45>> It's not very long.

17:47>> Well, all right. I mean, um but this is

17:49information that we would like to

17:50include in our file.

17:51>> Sure. Um um one I believe I misspoke

17:54when you said the 21 we haven't done one

17:57>> right now. I understand that Getty did

17:58you said back in 2023.

18:00>> It's somewhat irrelevant to our process

18:03because they're going to be in control.

18:05>> They control that site. They're going to

18:06clean it up. They're going to make all

18:07the decisions.

18:08>> But when but that I assume that's going

18:10to take place before you start your

18:11work. Correct.

18:12>> Before we start our work. Yes.

18:13>> And do we have any idea what that

18:15timetable is?

18:16>> Uh yes. It's very specific. If if we

18:18don't get our permits within 90 days,

18:20deal's dead and it's not going to

18:21happen.

18:22>> I see. Okay.

18:23>> Can we

18:24>> It's going to stay the way it is.

18:25>> Can we anticipate Getty filing with us

18:27as well?

18:28>> I'm sorry.

18:29>> Can we anticipate Getty filing with us

18:31as well?

18:32>> They'll do whatever they need to do

18:34whatever the requirements are. It's a

18:36big company. Like I said, we've done

18:37this, sir.

18:38>> They'll have um a licensed site

18:41professional that will be familiar with

18:43the process and will do everything with

18:45the town and the state. So what I'm

18:48hearing is that they're they need to do

18:50that thing. They need to remediate the

18:51site, evaluate the extent of

18:53contamination. Hopefully, although we

18:55don't know, we don't know what the

18:57extent is. Hopefully it's not

18:58significant, but you can't, assuming you

19:01get all your permits in place, you still

19:02can't start work until they do what they

19:04do.

19:04>> Correct.

19:05>> And we don't have any information

19:06concerning what that timeline may be

19:08from them. And I think you're telling me

19:11that unless you get your permits,

19:12they're not going to do it.

19:14>> That's my understanding. Yeah. All

19:16right. It would be nice to hear from

19:18Getty to find out.

19:19>> We we asked them. Um they're based in

19:21New York. They uh elected to send the

19:24email not to and not attend.

19:28>> Um

19:30it it's uh again it's

19:33the we've been through the process

19:35before and it's worked uh very well. Um,

19:38I mean, we we're we're secondary until

19:41they're done and they and they flip the

19:42green light on for us. And they also

19:44maintain an easement, a right to come

19:46back in, knock whatever we build down,

19:49and do more cleanup if they think they

19:50need to do it because obviously they're

19:52a deep pocket. Um, and they caused it.

19:55So, um, we have that's not ever happened

19:59to us before. Uh we've done our own

20:03version of this uh twice in Worcester.

20:06Once in Kelly Square, there's a a G

20:09Duncan Jersey Mike's car wash parcel

20:12across the street from Polar Park. We

20:14did that ourselves. We had bought that

20:16gas station. It was an old gas station.

20:19Raised it, cleaned the site, brought it

20:21back. I mean, it's a very linear

20:24process. The LSP uh and D generally make

20:28all the decisions. um and they'll

20:31greenlight it and if they need to engage

20:33the commission, they will engage the

20:34commission. Uh they're going to make

20:36sure they have every check off that they

20:37need before they hand us the keys and

20:40give us a deed. So,

20:42>> do you anticipate they would do this

20:44cleanup work this fall?

20:47>> Like I said, we're we have no decision-m

20:49authority once they once they begin the

20:51process, but they would prefer

20:53>> they giving you any indication.

20:55Uh well, I can tell you from my

20:56experience that they will move quickly

21:01once we've got our permits because they

21:04want to get the they want to close their

21:06books on it because it's an ongoing

21:08liability for them and they're publicly

21:09traded um and it affects their valuation

21:12and then they want our purchase price

21:14too. So, uh we've seen oil companies

21:17move with elacrity once

21:20our process is done.

21:22>> All right. And then you said permits.

21:24So, in in addition to the conservation

21:26commission, who else do you need to get

21:28permits from?

21:29>> Site plan approval from um the planning

21:32board and we need three pieces of relief

21:35from the zoning board. We've had a

21:37meeting each with them. Um and zoning

21:40board, I believe they were ready to

21:43approve it, but they had an advertising

21:45mistake. Um they only advertised one

21:49variance and and not all three pieces.

21:52We needed a special permit for the

21:53drive-thru and another piece of release

21:56uh a landscape buffer.

21:58>> Where are you with the planning board?

22:01>> Uh we had one complete meeting.

22:03>> Um we have a member here. Do you want to

22:05speak to it?

22:06>> Uh last time I remember I believe we

22:08asked you guys to come back with a

22:09traffic anal uh

22:12analytics for us. Um that's that's as

22:15much as I can remember.

22:17>> Yeah. And and the other thing was uh you

22:19were waiting for the peerreview results

22:21that you wanted to review before then

22:23before voting. Those are in uh we

22:25responded to those comments. Um

22:28>> review by whom?

22:29>> Peerre by whom?

22:31>> Uh Graves Engineering.

22:32>> Okay. We haven't seen that.

22:34>> We we just got it.

22:35>> Yeah.

22:36>> Two days ago. We can

22:38>> Yeah.

22:39>> Okay. I mean again it we just like to

22:42have as much information as possible so

22:43we can make an informed decision. You

22:45can understand that, right? read that

22:47letter from

22:49>> I'd rather have a copy.

22:50>> Well, we we'll make sure you have it,

22:52too.

22:52>> All right.

22:53>> But just so that you know what they're

22:55saying because that's the only

22:57communication that apparently they're

22:58willing to give.

22:59>> All right. Um I don't have any other

23:02questions. Any questions from the board?

23:09So, so it sounds like you're, if I'm

23:12going to make a football metaphor here,

23:15it sounds like you're at the 20 yardd

23:16line, but you're not quite ready to get

23:18into the end zone, at least tonight. So,

23:21um, my preference would be for the other

23:23information you've received, including,

23:25excuse me, the Graves, um, review, uh,

23:29whatever you got from Getty, um,

23:32the D, uh, D comments, and I understand

23:34they're not extensive. My preference

23:36would be to continue the public hearing

23:38this evening to our next meeting on

23:40September 9th, just because it sounds

23:42like you're you're moving along with the

23:43other boards, but you're also not quite

23:45there uh, as well. Is that fair? Uh

23:47again, the peer review was the last

23:49piece for I think a lot of that. Okay.

23:51Um we had a full traffic presentation.

23:54That was most of the planning board's

23:56concern.

23:58>> Um and then circulation within the site,

24:00how the drive-thru is configured. We

24:02looked at that. We can't make change

24:04that they thought we could and as you

24:06appear,

24:07it's probably impossible. Um and then

24:10whether and and we were asked to convey

24:14concerns of the town to do um because of

24:17the speed of the traffic on Route 20 um

24:20in the intersection there and that area

24:23is built up. There's more residences

24:24being built. There are businesses that

24:26are expanding which is a good thing. Um

24:28but it brings traffic. So uh that was

24:31mostly what I think believe the zoning

24:34board was ready to approve but planning

24:36had those questions. When are you going

24:38to meet with the planning board again?

24:41>> September 8th. Yeah.

24:42>> Okay. So, our next meeting is September

24:449th. So, do we have your ascent to

24:47continue the public hearing?

24:48>> Uh, yes. We'll request a continuence to

24:49and we'll get you that information.

24:51>> All right. Terrific. All right. Any

24:53questions from the board again? Any

24:55questions from the audience?

24:59>> There being none, I'll take a motion to

25:00continue the public hearing for um

25:03Branded Realy Group um two. Uh motion to

25:08continue the public hearing for BR

25:11Branded Realy Group to September 9th.

25:15>> What time?

25:16>> We can make it for uh some

25:20>> Thank you.

25:21>> Okay. Thank you. Okay. Uh there's been a

25:23motion

25:24>> second.

25:25>> Thank you. Any discussion? All those in

25:26favor say I. I. I. Oppos to vote. All

25:30right. Very good.

25:48Uh the next matter on our agenda is a

25:50710 public hearing. Uh the Auburn

25:52Department of Public Works request for

25:54determination of applicability for a

25:56proposed sidewalk improvement and

25:58stormwater drainage system repair along

26:00Binmar Avenue. Is there a motion open?

26:02Motion open.

26:03>> Is there a second?

26:05>> I'll second.

26:05>> Is there any discussion? All those in

26:07favor say I.

26:08>> I.

26:08>> I. Post.

26:10>> It's a vote.

26:12Good evening.

26:35Whenever you're ready.

26:37>> Good evening.

26:37>> My name is Larry Rossi. I'm a civil

26:39engineer that works for Wright Pierce.

26:41And with me tonight is uh Mr. Chuck

26:43Karen from Karen Environmental. We're

26:45here on behalf of the town of Auburn to

26:48present to you the RDA application for

26:50Brimmar Associated Sidewalk

26:52Improvements. Um we're talking about a

26:56limit of work uh approximately from the

26:59end of Warren Warren Road where the pump

27:02station is. Uh the scope of the project

27:05is on the westerly side of Binmar uh

27:08going north towards um the mass DOT uh

27:12rightway alongside of the bridge. Um

27:16it's approximately 1,000 lineal feet. Um

27:19we're abuing the the resource area of

27:21the Darkbrook Reservoir. So portions of

27:24the project are within the 100 foot

27:25buffer zone. Uh we submitted plans and

27:28details and so forth as well as a

27:30narrative uh to support this

27:32application. And tonight I have uh just

27:35a few of the the plan sets highlighted

27:38that shows the 100 foot buffer zone uh

27:41the limits of the erosion and

27:43sedimentation controls uh the the plan

27:45and the scope of work and the grading in

27:47black and white. uh and then I can flip

27:49through, you know, various uh

27:51presentation boards as needed. Uh but

27:53the the plan in front of you is is

27:55pretty much the focus of the area. It's

27:56on the southwest portion of the project.

27:59Uh like I said, it's it's abudding the

28:01the pump station and the scope of the

28:03work. There's an existing gravel path on

28:05the westerly side that kind of links um

28:09uh Warren Road sidewalk up towards uh

28:11the the bridge and the sidewalk that

28:13goes over the over the turnpike. Uh the

28:16scope of the project is is generally in

28:18that same uh path of the gravel path

28:21that's there today. Um it'll be a 5 foot

28:24wide sidewalk, puminous asphalt uh in

28:27accordance with the the town u detail

28:30and so forth. Um there will be um two

28:33new drainage structures that tie into

28:36existing drainage structures. Uh that

28:38area is on the southwest portion of the

28:41project and that discharges to an

28:43existing outfall. Um, as part of the

28:46scope, uh, that outfall will be

28:48improved. There's some erosion along

28:50along the hillside there. Um, and so

28:54we're proposing a new head wall,

28:55replacing the existing pipe uh, and and

28:58establishing a rip wrap energy

29:01dissipator or spillway. Um at that same

29:04location

29:05um roadway drainage currently conveys uh

29:09you know sheet flow overland flow

29:11towards the existing structures that are

29:14near the pump station. Uh we're

29:16proposing just based on the the

29:18differential settlement along Binmar. Uh

29:20the roadway is is relatively flat. Uh

29:23and there are some low points there

29:24today. So, we're proposing two new

29:26structures at those low points when um

29:29to kind of um reduce or or minimize some

29:33of the flooding that currently occurs.

29:35Um the sidewalk will be generally

29:38elevated as it relates to the to the

29:40travel way of the road. Uh there will be

29:43curbing. Uh there will be a horizontal

29:45separation between the the the the

29:48sidewalk utility strip or grass strip

29:51and the travel way. Um, continuing north

29:55uh where the turnpike uh has their

29:58maintenance driveway, there will be two

30:00accessible handicap ramps uh for uh safe

30:04crossing at that location and then the

30:06sidewalk will continue within the

30:08rightway uh but adjacent to the the two

30:11residential properties um on on the west

30:14side of Binmar. Um the scope of the work

30:17is is buffer zone. I know if there's any

30:20specific wetland related questions, uh

30:22Chuck can field those as it relates to

30:24the delineation along the Dark Brook

30:26Reservoir. Uh but in general, uh that's

30:29the scope of the project and we're here

30:31tonight to, you know, uh support the

30:33town and and request the commission to

30:35consider a negative determination.

30:39>> So, if I heard you correctly, you're

30:40going to be installing new drainage

30:41structures, right?

30:42>> That is correct. Yes. I don't see any

30:44details of those uh drain structures and

30:46what we've received.

30:48>> Um

30:49>> I what we have what I received was a set

30:51of construction drawings uh dated June

30:53of 2026 and I don't see um again any

30:57details relating to drainage structures.

31:00>> The the drainage structures will be a a

31:024ft diameter deep sump catch basin uh in

31:06accordance to the town detail. um

31:09that'll link into the existing two

31:11structures uh adjacent to the pump

31:13station. I believe the scope of that

31:15those two structures will be to remove

31:17and replace uh in kind new piping, new

31:21infrastructure prior to discharging to

31:23the existing outfall. Uh we're proposing

31:26a a hydrodnamic separator uh to remove

31:29um in addition to the deep sumps with

31:31hoods uh a proprietary device a squirrel

31:34chamber to remove some additional

31:36suspended solids uh and even limited

31:39phosphorus before the out uh discharge

31:41into the existing outfall.

31:43>> Now will these drain structures are they

31:45within or being installed within the

31:46buffer zone?

31:47>> Uh no they are outside the limit of

31:49work. I can show you.

31:50>> Tell me where.

31:52I guess my question would be, is there

31:54anything like where you're proposing new

31:56construction again to replace existing

31:59uh drainage or that sort of thing? Is

32:01any of that within um the buffer zone?

32:04>> Um on this plane, can you see it? Okay.

32:06I can hold it up.

32:08>> Yeah. Okay, that's better. Thank you,

32:10sir.

32:11Oh, that's much better.

32:12>> Yeah.

32:13>> So, this line right here represents the

32:15buffer zone.

32:16>> Okay.

32:16>> This is a zoomed in scale in the

32:18plantet. There's an overall

32:20>> Gotcha. These are two existing

32:22structures here today.

32:23>> All right.

32:24>> So, we're proposing a new uh drainage

32:26truck um heading north and that would be

32:30on the next.

32:32So, here's the yellow buffer zone.

32:35Here's our green BMP. These are the two

32:39uh catch basins within the travel way

32:42that will convey storm water down

32:45towards the south of the existing

32:46structure. So these structures are

32:48outside of the 100 buffer zone.

32:50>> All right.

32:51>> We are proposing a new structure within

32:54the buffer zone and that is an a CDS

32:57unit a contact uh swirl chamber uh to

33:01remove some of the suspended solids and

33:04that would be longterm in addition to

33:07the self.

33:08>> What would the maintenance schedule be

33:10for that?

33:11>> Uh typically typically it's it's

33:13bianual. Um, you know, there's there's

33:16periodic uh visual observations of those

33:18structures, but typically um it's it's

33:22either scooped out or back in the truck

33:23twice a year.

33:25>> Okay.

33:27>> I don't have any other questions. Do you

33:28any questions from the board?

33:32>> Any questions from the audience?

33:37Okay. When would you propose to start

33:40doing this work?

33:42Um

33:44>> it's my understanding that um the town

33:46is currently soliciting bids. Uh so

33:49pending the you know the the approval

33:51tonight we can further then coordinate

33:52with with um Greg and and Joanna at the

33:56town. Okay.

33:57>> It's my understanding that they're going

33:58to commence work this you know late this

34:01summer early fall.

34:03>> Okay.

34:04All right. Um,

34:09if there's no comment from the public

34:11and no other comments from the board, is

34:13there a motion to close a public hearing

34:15for the request for determination of

34:16applicability?

34:18>> Uh, a motion to close the public

34:20hearing.

34:21>> Is there a second?

34:23>> I'll second.

34:24>> Any discussion?

34:26All those in favor say I.

34:28>> I.

34:28>> Opposed. It's vote. All right. Thank you

34:31very much. We will probably render a

34:33decision this evening. Thank you.

34:35>> Thank you.

34:50>> The next matter on our agenda is a 7:15

34:52public hearing. Mast Futures LLC

34:55requesting an amended order of

34:57conditions for 615 Southbridge Street.

35:00Is there a motion open?

35:02>> Motion open. Is

35:03>> there a second?

35:04Second.

35:04>> Is there any discussion? All those in

35:07favor say I.

35:07>> I.

35:08>> I.

35:09>> Post vote.

35:12>> Good evening.

35:17>> Uh good evening. Garrett Horsefall with

35:18Kelly Engineering Group, civil engineer

35:20representing the project. So um believe

35:23in month of June or July the commission

35:24issued order conditions for this

35:25project. after it was issued, um DP

35:29um wanted one extra thing added to the

35:31plan um in terms of just clarifying the

35:34riverfront resource areas um in terms of

35:37keeping them um undisturbed and then the

35:41renaturalized state which I believe the

35:43commission had added as part of the

35:44order

35:45>> um special condition 12. However, I

35:47think D wanted the physical barriers

35:49shown on the plan. So what we've done is

35:52place boulders every 5 ft and um signage

35:56um every 25 ft which basically says do

35:59not mow um do not encroach um

36:02renaturalized area um that was the

36:04request of D. So, none of the other

36:07items on the plan have changed um in

36:09terms of layout, grading, utilities. Um

36:12there's simply in that riverfront zone,

36:15um boulders every 5 ft on center and

36:17signage every 25 ft.

36:20>> I'm sorry.

36:28>> So, I I guess I'm a little confused. We

36:30issued the order of conditions and then

36:32you received comments from D. We had

36:34received comments previously which we

36:36had responded to. Okay. Um and they were

36:38satisfied with and then they followed up

36:41after receiving your order that they had

36:44an additional comment that they wanted

36:46just extra protection shown on the plans

36:50um in in that riverfront zone.

36:53>> Okay. And the changes that you made on

36:55your plan sheet uh or plan set, which

36:59plan would that be?

37:00>> Sheet three, the layout plan.

37:01>> Okay. So, the signs I believe are in a

37:03magenta purple color and the boulders

37:06are um every 5t or so.

37:09>> Sure. Want to see the big one?

37:11>> Yeah, that's right. I can look at this

37:12one.

37:14>> Yeah. You want to see the big one? Hold

37:16on. So, the Is it fair to say the dots

37:21represent the boulders you put in? The

37:23dots were the um

37:27that that was the renaturalized area

37:29sort of the the conservation seed mix

37:30that we were placing. The the boulders

37:32were sort of the ovalish shape if you

37:36want to call it that. All right.

37:42>> Right along the edge of the the parking

37:44field there.

37:46>> Okay. Yeah. So it shows up a lot closer

37:48on that one. Uh all right. So, um

37:54I guess I'm trying to figure out what

37:56the best way is to amend the order of

37:57conditions. You know, it seems to me one

38:00way to do it would just be to record uh

38:03u sheet number three with the registry.

38:06>> We could reference this is the most

38:08current plan set like you said, just

38:10making sure that the documents are all

38:11online, nothing else changed. Storm

38:13water reports the same.

38:15>> Sure.

38:17Um

38:18all right. Any questions?

38:23Okay. You have any questions? No. All

38:25right. Any questions from the audience?

38:29There being none, um, is there a motion

38:31to close?

38:33>> A motion to close.

38:34>> Is there a second?

38:38>> Second.

38:39>> Thank you. Is there any discussion? All

38:42those in favor say I.

38:43>> I. I.

38:44>> Opposed. It's a vote. All right. Thank

38:48you, sir.

38:48>> Thank you for your time.

39:07Okay.

39:12All right. So that the next matter on

39:15our agenda is a discussion concerning

39:18reinstating DPW's blanket order of uh of

39:21conditions that we issued

39:24originally I think back in 2008 and it's

39:26been periodically renewed and which we

39:28revoked a couple of meetings ago.

39:32So who would like to address that on

39:34behalf of the town? Miss Veio, you seem

39:37eager to address address it. Sure.

39:43Thank you so much.

39:47It

39:48>> is very interesting meeting.

39:51>> I didn't hear any jokes though.

39:54>> Trying to butter me up.

39:55>> I didn't hear any jokes. You said you

39:56want a joke.

39:57>> Well, we haven't finished yet. We

39:59haven't finished yet. So, any event, can

40:02you just uh identify yourself for the

40:03record, please?

40:04>> Yeah. Dory Veio, town manager for the

40:06town of Auburn.

40:08Joanna Puquin, town uh engineer, DPW

40:11director.

40:12>> All right. Very good.

40:13>> So, um I wanted to come tonight because

40:16I do know that there was a vote taken a

40:18few maybe last month, I believe, to

40:20rescend

40:22um our blanket order of conditions at

40:24the Department of Public Works. There

40:26has been some issues with one of our

40:27contractors that we've been dealing

40:29with. Um, and we're here to talk a

40:32little bit more about that because the

40:34impact of this recision is um I can't I

40:39can't say anything else but massive in

40:41our ability to not get things done

40:43because it was um taken back. So, I

40:47would like to talk more to you about it

40:49and what we can do to work with the

40:52commission to make sure that we're all

40:53on the same page and that we're

40:54communicating effectively. I take

40:56responsibility for um not communicating

41:00effectively. I'm the town manager and

41:02ultimately it falls on me. And I wanted

41:05to come tonight to talk to you about

41:07that cuz I'm I'm serious. We I did

41:10outreach to Mike a few times through the

41:12process. We were out in the rain. Um it

41:15was interesting, but we have to do a

41:18better job and we have to bring more to

41:19you, whether it's through a contractor

41:22or ourselves. our goals, believe it or

41:25not, even though the lack of

41:26communication lately doesn't feel like

41:28that, are actually the same. Um, and

41:31we're on the same page. And that's why I

41:33wanted to come and and see what your

41:36thoughts were, what you recommend that

41:37we do. We want to provide you all the

41:40information that you need and get

41:42feedback from you and make the proper

41:44changes. Since we have spoken um Mike

41:48the past month or so, we've made changes

41:51in the way we go out to bid and how um

41:55some of the language that we were using

41:57that allowed some of the situations to

41:59happen and that was because of you and

42:01your recommendations. So, we have

42:04instituted some of that and I wanted to

42:06just um be honest and and see what we

42:09can do to do a better job to work with

42:11all of you.

42:15I'm not sure if there's anything else

42:16that could be said. Um, again, I I the

42:20DPW is under my purview. I I also take

42:24responsibility. I should have

42:26communicated um much better about what's

42:30going on with our roadway projects and

42:32that's something that I am going to

42:35correct. Um, I think that, you know,

42:39ultimately I would like to work

42:42together. Um, you know, we have, as Dory

42:46said, we have a co common goal. Um,

42:48storm water is under engineering. We're

42:51looking to be um, you know, we we're

42:53looking to protect um the natural

42:56resources in town. Um, just like you,

42:59we're just a little bit further away

43:01from the wetlands. Uh so we've always

43:03worked with um the land use enforcement

43:05officer to make sure that um you know we

43:09communicate our our concerns if we're

43:12out on the site and doing inspections.

43:15Um you know we we communicate whatever

43:17concerns we have um relative to

43:20wetlands. Um so I I just I want to

43:23broaden that relationship and you know

43:26work with with the um commission and uh

43:30and and move forward with you know with

43:33a relationship that we can you know of

43:35trust.

43:36So, um I um your predecessor Joanna Bill

43:40Coyle uh at least in the past had

43:45presented us with a list of um of

43:47streets that were being going to be

43:48worked on. And I I know we haven't seen

43:51that from the DPW in recent years. The

43:54other thing, of course, is that of of

43:56all the work that you're planning to do,

43:58I have no idea uh how many of those um

44:01of of those repair jobs or other

44:03projects um would trigger our

44:05jurisdiction. And so without knowing

44:07where you're doing the work, it's just

44:09we can't evaluate uh you know what

44:12impact if any that work is going to

44:14have. And I think um you know I I think

44:17Lynch is an extreme case as we've

44:19discussed um because for a variety of

44:23reasons um uh

44:26which I won't get into tonight because

44:28we've actually already spoken about

44:29them. I we want to make sure that there

44:31isn't a repeat of of that situation

44:34because you know

44:36we know that um and I spoke to Greg

44:39Sodto yesterday I think and you know the

44:43the fact that they decided to undertake

44:45church and south streets at the same

44:47time to suit their schedule didn't um

44:51benefit the town um at least from my

44:53point of view. Uh, I think it's um it

44:56led to and the fact that they didn't

44:58install version control measures. We

45:00think there's been environmental impact

45:02and now we're going to have to hire

45:03someone. Then we voted to hire a

45:05consultant to determine uh whether there

45:07is an impact and what the extent of that

45:09impact is. Um a situation that um could

45:14should have been avoided and um it's

45:17still um I'm just still scratching my

45:21head over why it it um they didn't take

45:22it seriously. But aside from that, so um

45:27I think the first step is to get a sense

45:29of of where you're going to be doing the

45:31work. The second is of those projects. I

45:34presume that there are certain projects

45:35that have no will well and impact

45:37whatsoever. And clearly if if there's if

45:41you're not um doing work with you know

45:43within our jurisdiction and as as you as

45:46you know Joanna from our conversation

45:48you know our jurisdiction is is more

45:50extensive than the wellness protection

45:52act and we did that uh for a reason uh

45:54because um our you know we our wetland

45:57uh system here in Auburn the streams and

46:00uh uh the channels it's an important

46:02resource and um people I think take it

46:05for granted but uh it's it's highly it's

46:08veryant important and we're the stewards

46:10of protecting it. So, um and and I will

46:14also say this, I think whatever order we

46:17issued back in 2008 probably needs to be

46:19upgraded as well. You know, it's

46:21probably uh it would make sense to

46:23revisit it to determine what what

46:25worked, what maybe could work better and

46:28that sort of thing. M

46:29>> so um I my sense is that the first thing

46:32I would want to see is to get a sense of

46:34what you are proposing to work on and

46:36then from there we can get a

46:38determination of of whether of what

46:40needs to be done you know now for

46:42example you know we have um we have

46:44Binmar that came before us tonight you

46:47know and in that case um you know there

46:50was SWIP done but they also had the good

46:51sense to file um an RDA with us because

46:55you know that's what that's what the the

46:57SWIP requires and what your contract

46:59requires as well. So, um that that's my

47:02initial my initial thought is before we

47:05would um maybe reinstate it, I'd like to

47:07see what you're working on.

47:09>> So, um we have started the process of of

47:12um starting that communication. Um Greg

47:15had um sent over uh some documents um on

47:20the roads that are being done. Um so

47:23it's basically uh um sheets of the

47:27location of the road work um delineating

47:30wetlands and basically pointing out you

47:33know if there's any drainage

47:35infrastructure is being changed or

47:36anything like that. So um we can forward

47:40that along however you would want to to

47:43do that if if you'd like to have it sent

47:46out directly um through the chair or

47:48through Nat, however that works. Um do

47:51that. What you could do is if you have

47:53um a list of proposed projects and I

47:55understand you want to streamline the

47:57process so that you don't have to do an

47:58RDA or notice of intent. Well, if you do

48:01a notice of intent, then clearly there's

48:03going to be more work that has to be

48:04done. But for those projects where an

48:06RDA may very well just make make a

48:09determination of whether um you know, we

48:12think more needs to be done or not, that

48:15would be helpful. And also we have um

48:17and I I don't know if you're aware of

48:19this but we have in the past issued

48:22negative determinations but with

48:24conditions so that for example rush

48:26control measures um um you know certain

48:30notifications to us that sort of thing

48:32and that has actually proven to be

48:34pretty effective. So it's instead of a

48:36full-blown notice of intent, you've got

48:39basically a positive determinate or a

48:41negative determination but with with

48:43enhancements or protections.

48:46So is there um any possibility of us

48:50providing that documentation as part of

48:52that blanket order of conditions um with

48:57um already determined areas if there

49:01we where there where there is um any

49:05proximity to wetlands um showing where

49:08um we're directing the contractor to put

49:12erosion control prior to any

49:14construction. Obviously, um in addition

49:16to any other areas that might, you know,

49:18um might be uphill up gradient,

49:20sometimes we put erosion control

49:22upgradient, you know, um just so that um

49:25runoff doesn't go onto private property.

49:28>> Can I just

49:29>> Yeah, please go ahead. So, when I've had

49:33contractors come to my house to do work,

49:37most of the contractors that are doing

49:39work at my house will say to me, "I'm

49:42not going to do this until you get

49:44permits."

49:46>> Most competent contractors will look at

49:50an area and already know that it's a

49:52wetland and what they need to do and

49:54whether or not they need to have a a

49:56permit for it. So I don't understand

50:01like why aren't these contractors

50:04looking at it saying we need to do this?

50:07>> So the in the past we haven't had this

50:10issue. We've worked with another

50:12contractor and they and

50:15whether it was the SWIP or whether it

50:18was um any other permitting um authority

50:22um they knew, okay, there's a sensitive

50:25area. There's a a possibility of um

50:30erosion that I I'm going to need to

50:32control and they they've addressed it

50:34before, you know, before any any

50:37construction started. Um this is a new

50:40contractor that we haven't worked with

50:42in a long time that was working on South

50:45and um Church Street and

50:50that's not that's not been my

50:53experience. It's it's a our my

50:55experience with this contractor is

50:57unlike what we've been used to for

51:00>> nothing written in the contract that we

51:03have with that contractor saying that

51:05they're responsible for any damage

51:07that's done to the environment or any

51:09damage that's done on the job because of

51:13their negligence.

51:15>> I believe there might be I I can't

51:18imagine that there isn't I I'd have to

51:20refer back to the the contract. It's

51:22been a long time and it's a it's a long

51:24contract, but I can't imagine that there

51:25isn't um language. So,

51:29>> you know, the other option too,

51:31Michelle, and we're getting a little off

51:32track here, but you know, as you know,

51:34we have the ability to fine and I mean,

51:36I think in terms of we discussed at our

51:39last meeting, and I know you weren't

51:40present. No, it's all right.

51:42>> But we were um we talked about issuing

51:44an enforcement against Lynch and um you

51:47know, we have the power to impose fines.

51:50I think the only question is we have to

51:52figure out how to impose the fine. There

51:54has to be a logical uh basis for it. And

51:56I I'm inclined not to do anything with

51:58lunch until they finish the work in the

52:00town.

52:01>> I I have to agree with that. And I mean

52:03at this point

52:05>> because you know the what what is it um

52:07the you can't the horse has gotten out

52:10of the barn

52:11>> and that's exactly it.

52:12>> So something like that. I mean, so this

52:14I I guess what Mike was saying, we could

52:17only kind of move forward and

52:19>> Mhm.

52:21>> I mean, I I guess like

52:23>> I will say this, if if you're hoping for

52:26us to reinstate the blanket or of

52:28tonight, I mean, my feeling is no. My

52:32feeling is is that you need to give us

52:34some more information. We're not opposed

52:36to it, but we need more from you. And

52:40like I said, we need a list of streets.

52:42We need to get a sense and you're not

52:44telling me how you said it's impacting

52:46your work. You need to explain to me how

52:48it's impacting your work. I mean it

52:50didn't certainly it didn't impact what

52:53you're proposing to do for Binmar. So if

52:55you can explain to me how not having the

52:58blanket order affects your ability to to

53:00to do the things you need to do. I need

53:04to know that. I think we all need to

53:05know that.

53:06>> So if I may, Mr. Chairman, first of all,

53:08and I and I sent you an email today.

53:10There should have been a public hearing

53:12to retract this this um

53:16>> blanket order of concern.

53:17>> Is that according to town council

53:19>> or is that your own opinion?

53:21>> No, I'm I'm serious.

53:22>> No, I I didn't. If you want me to, I

53:24can. I I

53:26all I'm saying is that we we have

53:30contractors that are trying to do the

53:32right thing, which is Binmar. Um Lynch

53:35we've had problems with before. They

53:37were the low bidder. They will never

53:38come back and work in town again. As far

53:40as long as I'm town manager, we've had a

53:42lot of issues with them. More than just

53:45what you guys are aware of, there's been

53:47a lot of issues. We do have insurance.

53:50We do have coverage. We can go after

53:52them. It would be helpful if if you

53:56could help us with that a little bit

53:57because it gives us a little bit more

53:58teeth. So when they are low bidder next

54:00time, we don't need to we have something

54:03that we can bypass them.

54:05>> They are very difficult to work with. I

54:07went on the site. We were all on the

54:09site. You were on the site. It was not a

54:12good situation. They had minimal

54:16protections. I saw it myself and I don't

54:18even know what they were supposed to

54:20have. I just saw that it just wasn't

54:22enough. Um the work that I'm talking

54:25about is less about our contractors

54:26because they need to come in front of

54:28you anyway. I think they should always

54:30come in front of you and give you the

54:32plan. So that is not I don't want this.

54:36That's not necessarily where I'm

54:37concerned. I'm concerned about our guys

54:40doing projects for us that we need to

54:42talk to you about and give you

54:44information about. That's what the order

54:46of conditions that I'm worried about

54:47necessarily our work. Um, and I want to

54:50work with you on how best to relay that

54:52information. The contractual side of it,

54:54I think they're very clear. Like I said,

54:57we've amended the bid, especially how

55:00long roads will be open and and things

55:02like that that we had discussed because

55:04that led to this problem as well, but

55:06more if our guys are going out to do any

55:09type of work and it's near a water

55:12within the 100 ft.

55:13>> So, you're talking about an emergency

55:15situation.

55:16>> Yeah. But Yeah. Yeah. Pretty much it

55:18would be an emergency situation, right?

55:20But we still need, you know,

55:22>> so I I think you need to if you want to

55:24distinguish if you're telling me, you

55:26know, we really if we have an emergency

55:28situation, there's a, you know, a

55:30pothole that could swallow a Buick, you

55:32know, it makes sense to me and that's

55:34the middle of the street, but maybe it's

55:35within 100 ft of the Wellins or

55:37something. I mean, I think an emergency

55:39situation probably entitles you to not

55:42having to give us immediate

55:43notification, but letting us know after

55:45the fact. Um but again it's a question

55:48of you know and we found out about Lynch

55:52after the fact and after it had rained

55:55after uh it made a mess of the roads uh

55:58on South Street and the the side streets

56:00off of South Street and Church Street

56:02too for that matter and um you know no

56:05one no one wants to be caught uh

56:07offguard like that um and I know and I

56:10know that's your feeling too. Um, you

56:12know, so I I guess I need to know

56:15specifically

56:18what you're asking for because I'm it's

56:20not clear to me what you're asking for.

56:22You're just saying, well, reinstate the

56:23the order the blanket order conditions.

56:25And I'm saying to you, for what? For

56:28what type of work are you talking

56:29emergency situations? That's what I'm

56:31saying. And and the only way we will

56:33know that is if you tell us what you're

56:35doing. So, I mean, I'm sure there are

56:36instances where you have emergencies,

56:40legitimate emergencies, where maybe

56:41you're within our jurisdiction and that

56:44c can't wait. I understand that we meet

56:46twice twice a month. Um, but but if if

56:50you're talking about other like smaller

56:52projects where you can give us or tell

56:54you tell us where the the work is being

56:56done,

56:57>> that would be helpful.

56:58>> No, I agree with you there.

56:59>> We haven't seen that. We haven't seen a

57:01list of

57:01>> I agree of what DPW has done in in

57:04years.

57:05um six times since 2010 2020 which is

57:09not a lot.

57:10>> It is not a lot. You know how much road

57:11work road work we've done since 2020 and

57:14no one's come before you. It's not

57:16acceptable. We've had this I've had this

57:19conversation

57:20um with my staff. There was a

57:22misunderstanding that is very clear now

57:26in regards to responsibility and we take

57:29that very seriously and that's why I'm

57:31here. So, I'm telling you, um, you don't

57:34have to reinstate this, but if there are

57:38projects that are being impeded,

57:42um, I'll probably give you a call and

57:44ask what you want us to do, and it may

57:46be an emergency. Like, that's my biggest

57:48concern. Um, most things are planned,

57:52and if they're planned, there should be

57:54no problem.

57:55>> I think we all agree. Okay. Um this was

57:58an extenduating circumstance that no one

58:01is happy about. Not one person in um the

58:06town is happy about and they shouldn't

58:08be. So we will be holding them

58:11accountable as much as we can and we

58:12hope that you do too.

58:13>> Okay. Would you like to speak?

58:16>> Yeah, if you don't mind. Sorry.

58:17>> Hi, my name is Pete Borie. I'm the

58:19assistant DPW director, sewer

58:21superintendent. So through the chair, if

58:23I could just ask for some clarification.

58:25When we go out to bid and hire

58:26subcontractors and require them to

58:29prepare and provide us with a storm

58:31water pollution prevention plan, which

58:33is often called the SWIP, which is done

58:36under the contractor's um EPA NIP's

58:41permit number, subsidiary of that,

58:43>> right? Um, do you consider that being a

58:46parallel permit to our order of

58:49conditions or I I just need some

58:52>> I know the square for lynch talked about

58:54I believe it said that they had to

58:56comply with local bylaws and

58:58regulations.

58:59>> Our contract requires the contractor to

59:02um make sure they adhere to any local

59:06and state rules and regul understood.

59:09>> Yeah.

59:10So, and I've heard this argument before.

59:12Uh, you know, I've had a spirited

59:13discussion uh with an engineer friend of

59:16mine who thinks that this whip exempts

59:19um the contractor from filing uh with

59:22the locality and I disagree with him on

59:24that. So, I think um

59:28I mean I guess my position would be

59:30since our uh bylaws and regulations are

59:33more stringent than the Wellness

59:35Protection Act in the in the state that

59:37they have to file. But again, it it's,

59:39you know, I we're talking about

59:41something in a vacuum. I if I would want

59:43to know specifically like in the case of

59:46of Lynch, and that's a perfect example.

59:47They should have filed a notice of

59:49intent with us.

59:50>> So,

59:51>> I have no doubt no doubt about that in

59:53my mind

59:53>> through the chair. So, when you mention

59:55notice of intent versus RDA,

59:57>> right,

59:57>> there's a big difference there as far as

1:00:00timing and

1:00:02>> us being able to have our contractors be

1:00:04efficient. And I'm not arguing either

1:00:06way. I'm just trying to clarify

1:00:09what rules you're going to want us to

1:00:11follow moving forward. So, and I just

1:00:13want to see if we if there's a

1:00:15separation between our blanket order of

1:00:17conditions and what our some contractor

1:00:20is going to apply for either through an

1:00:23NOI or an RDA. Um I I would ask that

1:00:27that the commission consider an RDA with

1:00:30the ability to condition it. that way

1:00:33there we're not waiting four to 6 months

1:00:36for mass D to provide us with a number.

1:00:39Um cuz again the projects I I can

1:00:43understand if it's a large scale project

1:00:44and that's what the RDA will allow you

1:00:46to to assess a large scale project that

1:00:49may need to go in front of D. Yes. um

1:00:52some of our smaller paving projects

1:00:53where only a portion of it might be in a

1:00:55resource area. May may maybe that that's

1:00:58a negative determination and you will

1:01:00have the flexibility to make that

1:01:02determination as needed. So again, the

1:01:05biggest question for me is is does the

1:01:09SWIP run parallel with our order of

1:01:12conditions or is our order and can in

1:01:15essence keep our order of conditions

1:01:17separate. that way there. If the

1:01:19contractor we hire does not adhere to

1:01:22the SWIP and the erosion and control

1:01:25plan and it's not adequate, our blanket

1:01:27order doesn't get attached to that and

1:01:30the town or the DPW is a little

1:01:32protected from what a contractor might

1:01:35do that we don't necessarily have

1:01:37oversight as far as means and methods

1:01:40go.

1:01:40>> Yeah, I understand that. I I I take your

1:01:42point.

1:01:43>> Thank you.

1:01:43>> Thank you.

1:01:48I think that's what I was trying to say.

1:01:50>> Okay.

1:01:51>> I was trying to separate it the two.

1:01:54Like, so if they're a large project, we

1:01:56have a contractor, they have to come

1:01:58before you. And what I feel like is that

1:02:00they're being tied and I don't know

1:02:03enough. This isn't my area of expertise,

1:02:05obviously, and I don't know enough. So

1:02:08what Peter was saying is that if the are

1:02:11our the town our DPW order of conditions

1:02:14is separate from what all the

1:02:17contractors have to do.

1:02:19>> Understood. Understood. And I think when

1:02:22um the problems with Lynch's work uh

1:02:24came uh to our to my attention to the

1:02:27commission's attention it um because

1:02:30nothing had been done. It was unclear. I

1:02:32mean, I didn't learn about the script, I

1:02:34think, until re until

1:02:38a few days before our last meeting,

1:02:40whenever we had our meeting. And uh, you

1:02:42know, again, my my thought was, well,

1:02:45why wasn't this provided to us at from

1:02:47at the at the at the get- go,

1:02:49>> you know? So, um,

1:02:52I mean, I I I take your I really do take

1:02:55your point, and I I don't want you to

1:02:58get the impression that that we

1:03:00penalized you. Although maybe we did.

1:03:03Um, but I I just think again there has

1:03:07to be and and you know I understand I

1:03:11think that Lynch is is the outlier.

1:03:13Lynch is like the the bad apple. Okay.

1:03:17Of all the work, you know, and I don't

1:03:19know how many uh um out outside

1:03:21contractors you or third party

1:03:23contractors you deal with, but it seems

1:03:25to me that u they by far have been um

1:03:29the least responsive. How's that? So,

1:03:33um, but but we need to know what you're

1:03:34doing. I mean, so we can do an

1:03:36evaluation. So, um, and that's that's

1:03:40all I have to say. I don't know if

1:03:41anyone else on the board has any

1:03:42comments. Please join us. I I'm the only

1:03:45one who seems to talk, so please jump

1:03:47in. Anyone?

1:03:48>> I'm curious about your plan, right?

1:03:50because you know I would imagine being a

1:03:53civil engineer myself that you're

1:03:56planning this work now for next year or

1:04:00subsequent years. So you know some of

1:04:03these impacts

1:04:06for planning purposes and maybe you

1:04:08could come before us or with that list

1:04:12December.

1:04:15I I do I'm not a chapter 90 guy, so

1:04:17that's not my thing. But your storm

1:04:20water improvements, your water

1:04:22improvements, anything uh you know,

1:04:25sewer, sanitary sewer, that kind of

1:04:27stuff, you guys are obviously planning

1:04:32two, three years, four years, five

1:04:34years,

1:04:35>> if I may through the through the chair.

1:04:37Sure. Um so we do have a broad plan of

1:04:41what roads we're looking at um re

1:04:44resurfacing. Um it's fluid because a

1:04:49road it might disintegrate you know

1:04:52within a year and we we have to pivot.

1:04:56So there is there is a planning process

1:04:58but there is also um there's a lot of

1:05:00variables that are in place uh whether

1:05:03it's the road disintegrating or a pipe

1:05:06or dealing with a lot of metal pipes

1:05:08that are disintegrating all at once. So

1:05:12um so we we kind we do have to pivot um

1:05:15you know as as the year goes by. Um in

1:05:19addition to the fact that um our budget

1:05:23isn't usually finalized you the um the

1:05:26the town budget gets finalized a lot

1:05:29earlier than the state budget. So um

1:05:33I'm going to say

1:05:34>> but you could but you could because you

1:05:36have an idea.

1:05:37>> We have an idea. It's just

1:05:38>> and you could kind of come in and go

1:05:40yeah it's fluid. It's variable. Some

1:05:42things may go or may not go or may move

1:05:45but these are the jobs that may have

1:05:48impacts for us

1:05:50>> if if I can through the chair I think

1:05:52it's worthwhile to provide that list to

1:05:54you even if it's even if it changes so

1:05:57that you at least have an idea

1:05:59>> exactly

1:05:59>> because

1:06:02if you don't even have the list that

1:06:04changes then you don't have anything um

1:06:07and that's what we had talked about and

1:06:09like each year and I've watched it the

1:06:11last couple years it does change, but

1:06:12the majority stays the same. And one of

1:06:15the things that we have to do that

1:06:16Joanna and I have talked about is

1:06:19timing. The timing of all this road

1:06:22construction is always crunched.

1:06:25Doesn't have to be like that. It

1:06:27doesn't. And and if things were planned

1:06:30sooner, whether we're submitting

1:06:32information to do sooner in the year, it

1:06:34gives us more time, whether it's us or

1:06:37the contractor, to go in front of you

1:06:38and to share the information with you

1:06:40and get feedback from you. That is my

1:06:42goal with DPW. Um, and then even if we

1:06:47do that, we still have plenty of time in

1:06:49the season if it we just have to do it

1:06:51early enough in the year. The first

1:06:53start, the first thing would be to give

1:06:54you the list that we're working from.

1:06:56You can see we can even do and correct

1:06:59me if I'm wrong, but we can check on

1:07:02those lists what's within 100 ft of a

1:07:05water body. We can like it's fairly easy

1:07:08to tell. We should be able to do that.

1:07:10We can we can definitely provide a a

1:07:12general list. Um the the the specifics

1:07:15that you know where the drainage system

1:07:18is being changed or anything like that

1:07:20that wouldn't happen until you know

1:07:23before before construction. But

1:07:25absolutely I I'm happy to share.

1:07:27>> Yeah. You know, as a resident too, I'll

1:07:29be out driving around. I may know the

1:07:31list. I may just kind of, you know, I

1:07:33didn't see South Street till I think I

1:07:35tried to drive down and it was closed

1:07:37and I just

1:07:39didn't bother. But it's just I know I

1:07:42have to put lists together and I have to

1:07:43get approvals for budgets, etc. So,

1:07:45right.

1:07:46>> And I I know things move,

1:07:48>> but still I just to have it out there.

1:07:52>> Thank you.

1:07:52>> I think it'd be helpful.

1:07:55>> It was a few years ago that they were

1:07:58doing work on Oxford Street. I don't

1:08:00know if it's Oxford Street. near the

1:08:01church near St. Joseph's Church

1:08:04>> and

1:08:06I had driven by.

1:08:07>> This was before you guys. So, yay.

1:08:10Sorry, the pressure is off. Yeah,

1:08:12exactly. When they were doing the work

1:08:15though, I live near there and there was

1:08:18a again a big rain event and the water

1:08:21was ripping down the hill into the pond.

1:08:26So even though it wasn't within a

1:08:28hundred feet

1:08:30>> that they were doing the work, the water

1:08:32was running down that hill into the

1:08:35waterway. So sometimes even though the

1:08:37work may not be within 100 ft,

1:08:40>> it's it does impact that waterway and

1:08:43the storm drains.

1:08:44>> So

1:08:45>> absolutely. And I think even on South

1:08:47Street, I saw that because I mean, yes,

1:08:50there was work within 100 ft of the

1:08:52water, but I think it even started

1:08:54farther away when I saw the stream

1:08:56coming down. Um, you I agree with you

1:09:00100% that any any place like that small

1:09:03stream um

1:09:06could have potentially had a huge

1:09:08impact. And the same thing with the the

1:09:11pond and the lakes. anytime we're doing

1:09:14any work near there I have this newfound

1:09:16respect for um controls erosion controls

1:09:20now since this has happened with Lynch

1:09:22which I I sort of like because I'm

1:09:24interested in it but now when I see

1:09:26construction I live in Wester I see

1:09:28construction work I'm like and I see

1:09:30what they're using I'm like that's not

1:09:31going to hold up that's not going to

1:09:32hold up in a good rainstorm

1:09:33>> you should complain to the conservation

1:09:35commission

1:09:36>> I saw what happened like it some of the

1:09:39controls worked but a good rainstorm

1:09:42they did not went right over. That's

1:09:43right.

1:09:44>> And it's just it's disturbing on what

1:09:46can happen and the impact that has on

1:09:47our environment. So, I just Yeah, I I

1:09:50agree with you. I think we need to be

1:09:52much more conscientious. Um, and we feel

1:09:55exactly the same way you do. And I think

1:09:57improved communications, changing the

1:09:59timeline, changing what's in the bid

1:10:01dock, so no road is open for that amount

1:10:03of time, which was absurd. um and making

1:10:08sure they come before you with not just

1:10:10their SWIP, but like from what I I'm not

1:10:13real familiar with SWIPS, but from what

1:10:15you said, they were it wasn't that

1:10:17strong. It

1:10:19>> Well, the problem is that we never saw

1:10:20the SWIP and and as Peter indicated,

1:10:23it's really that's a different process

1:10:25through it's through the EPA and and

1:10:27their their NEPTAS permit,

1:10:30>> National Pollution Discharge Elimination

1:10:32System.

1:10:34So, um, so that that's a different

1:10:36jurisdiction, but just because they have

1:10:38a they've done a SWIP doesn't relieve

1:10:40them of their responsibility to file

1:10:42with us. And, you know, and and I think

1:10:44to to u Mr. Bora's point, you know, they

1:10:48can have a SWIP and it may be that uh an

1:10:50RDA is sufficient. You know, I would

1:10:52submit that um that one should have

1:10:54filed. I don't know that that an RDA was

1:10:57appropriate, but I think I mean they

1:10:59started that project in June, right?

1:11:03So, it's been we're going on the third

1:11:04month now and um they they had

1:11:08sufficient time to file with us. So,

1:11:09that's not an excuse, you know, and

1:11:11again um I think in emergency situation,

1:11:15I think you do what you need to do. You

1:11:17know, you don't have you notify us maybe

1:11:19after the fact, but uh you don't have

1:11:21to, you know, worry about filing an RDA

1:11:23with us. I mean, exent circumstances, I

1:11:26think, require immediate action.

1:11:30So um okay

1:11:37so I think we have a handle on this. I

1:11:38think we um maybe we can continue this

1:11:41discussion at our next meeting.

1:11:43>> Yep.

1:11:43>> Okay.

1:11:44>> Thank you so much.

1:11:45>> Thank you for coming in.

1:11:46>> Of course. Thank you.

1:11:59All right. So, we've got some decisions

1:12:01to render.

1:12:06Uh, let's do u Masked Futures LLC first.

1:12:10So,

1:12:12I mean,

1:12:14we already issued an order of

1:12:16conditions. DP modified it. I just

1:12:19wonder if by just um recording the plan

1:12:23sheet number three on their amended

1:12:24plans if that's sufficient.

1:12:27>> Sufficient enough for me. Yeah. Me, too.

1:12:29It's like little dots on on any

1:12:32>> Okay. Seriously,

1:12:33>> it's clearly labeled.

1:12:35>> It is clearly It's tiny, but it's

1:12:36clearly labeled. So, if that's the case,

1:12:39is there a motion um to that effect,

1:12:41please?

1:12:45>> How would I say this one? A motion to

1:12:47accept the plans for sheet three with

1:12:50our previous order of conditions.

1:12:52>> Yeah. With the requirement that it be

1:12:53recorded at the registry of deeds. Did

1:12:55you say that?

1:12:56>> I did.

1:12:56>> I think so.

1:12:57>> Okay. Ma'am, didn't hear that part. All

1:12:58right. Is there a second?

1:13:00>> Second. Is there any discussion? All

1:13:02those in favor say I.

1:13:04>> I.

1:13:04>> I.

1:13:06>> Megan, you awake?

1:13:08>> Yes. I

1:13:09>> Okay. All right. Anyone opposed? It's a

1:13:11vote. Um, with respect to um Brenmar.

1:13:17Now, one of the drainage um what what do

1:13:21you call it? a a cy not cyclone, but

1:13:24there's going to be um a um a drainage

1:13:29uh structure that is going to be

1:13:30installed within 100 ft of the wetland.

1:13:34Now, and apparently it's the only one,

1:13:36but I'm a little disturbed by the fact

1:13:38that they didn't provide us with any

1:13:39details concerning the other drain

1:13:41structures they're going to be

1:13:43installing. So, wasn't any in the

1:13:46details?

1:13:47>> This is what I got. I got a site plan. I

1:13:50did not see I got drawings.

1:13:53That's what I got.

1:13:56Unless you got something I didn't get,

1:13:58which is certainly possible.

1:14:01>> I thought I saw usually I could be

1:14:03wrong, too.

1:14:03>> There's usually a detail page. Uh Mark,

1:14:05as you know, at the back,

1:14:08>> uh go back C503.

1:14:10>> Is it

1:14:11>> forward?

1:14:13>> Oh,

1:14:14>> yeah. And

1:14:15>> well, hush my mouth. All right.

1:14:18>> Right. Nope.

1:14:19>> Okay. All right. You're right.

1:14:21>> C503.

1:14:23>> It's a contact.

1:14:24>> Okay.

1:14:26>> NY CDS.

1:14:28>> Well, I would say that they have

1:14:29provided that to us then.

1:14:31>> Yeah.

1:14:32>> I just thought you didn't have it.

1:14:34>> I didn't have one.

1:14:35>> Yeah. Okay. So, um,

1:14:40do we want to I mean, it seems to me

1:14:42since they are doing work within the

1:14:44buffer zone, but it's not it's not like

1:14:48within 25 ft. Do we want to just maybe

1:14:51put in some language to make sure that

1:14:52they are extra special careful when they

1:14:55install that um that unit?

1:14:58>> So, negative determination with

1:15:00>> with a condition.

1:15:03So, is anyone up to making a motion?

1:15:07Anyone? Buer.

1:15:10>> All right.

1:15:12>> Mark, you have the civil

1:15:13>> Yeah, that's

1:15:14>> engineering experience. I was going to

1:15:15say

1:15:16>> motion to

1:15:19motion negative determination of

1:15:21applicability.

1:15:22>> Okay.

1:15:23>> With a condition that the erosion

1:15:28sedimentation controls are in place

1:15:32prior. before work.

1:15:33>> Work stop prior to commencement of any

1:15:36work.

1:15:36>> Okay, that's fair.

1:15:39>> Is any you want anyone want to discuss

1:15:41that? Megan, is that good with you?

1:15:45>> Sounds great to me.

1:15:49>> Thank you.

1:15:50>> Megan,

1:15:51>> yeah. Can you not hear me? That sounds

1:15:53good to me.

1:15:54>> Okay. All right. So, there's a motion.

1:15:56Is there a second?

1:15:57>> All right. Is there any discussion? All

1:15:59those in favor say I.

1:16:01>> I. opposed. It's a vote. All right.

1:16:07>> Okay. Um

1:16:10Nat, do you have anything else?

1:16:12>> No, we got a couple things coming out

1:16:13the pipeline. So,

1:16:14>> okay. But nothing for tonight?

1:16:16>> No. I mean, I have reached out to a

1:16:18couple of different um environmental

1:16:20contractors for hiring a consultant for

1:16:22South Street.

1:16:24>> A lot of conf a lot of people have

1:16:25conflicts of interest.

1:16:27>> I reach Is that right?

1:16:28>> Yes. I've reached out to Ecotech. They

1:16:30have a conflict of interest. Um, they're

1:16:32they don't have any uh

1:16:34>> name on staff.

1:16:35>> Well, they they have too much on their

1:16:37plate. Um, FWCA has a conflict of

1:16:39interest. I've also reached out to CDM

1:16:42Smith. Haven't heard back. GZA, haven't

1:16:44heard back. Titanbond, haven't heard

1:16:45back. And I have not been able to reach

1:16:46Margaret Washburn.

1:16:48>> Okay. As in, you leave messages and she

1:16:50doesn't respond.

1:16:51>> I wasn't even able to get to her

1:16:53voicemail. I think the number I got

1:16:55might not be working. Uh, Paul Dequila

1:16:57is reaching out to his contacts to see.

1:16:59Yeah, maybe go on Google.

1:17:00>> I did go on Google.

1:17:01>> You couldn't find anything, huh? She

1:17:03might be retired. I don't know. Well,

1:17:06>> it's summer. She could be on vacation.

1:17:07>> She could be on vacation.

1:17:09>> Okay.

1:17:10>> I have been

1:17:10>> Well, I appreciate your efforts. Um, but

1:17:12yeah, if you could u stick with that.

1:17:15>> Oh, I will be.

1:17:16>> Okay. In that case, if there's no new

1:17:19business, is there a motion to adjurnn?

1:17:21>> Motion to adjurnn.

1:17:22>> Yep.

1:17:23>> A second.

1:17:24>> Yep. Is not Yep. is not submission. It

1:17:27has to be a second.

1:17:29Okay. All those in favor say I.

1:17:31>> I.

1:17:32>> I.

1:17:32>> I.

1:17:33>> Yeah. No one opposes it ever. All right.

1:17:35It's a vote. All right, everyone. Thank

1:17:36you very much.