2026-09-09 - Conservation Commission

00:06All right, welcome to this Wednesday,

00:09September 9th, 2026 open meeting of the

00:13town of Auburn Conservation Commission

00:15is being operated as a hybrid format

00:17under chapter 22 of the acts of 2022.

00:21The public can join the meeting remotely

00:23by telephone

00:2514086503123

00:30with access code 645782

00:35357

00:36or the public can join via computer

00:40atme.go.com

00:43Auburn conference room 1. All supporting

00:46materials that have been provided to the

00:48members of this body are available on

00:51town's website. The public is encouraged

00:53to follow along using the posted agenda.

00:56As a pre preliminary matter, I am

00:59Rickyman, vice chair of the conservation

01:02commission.

01:04Please permit me to confirm that all

01:05members and persons of the agenda are

01:08participating remotely in presence and

01:10can hear me. Uh I'm going to call upon

01:13the members of the board. Uh Megan

01:15Langley

01:16>> here.

01:17>> Um Michelle Coros

01:18>> here.

01:19>> Mark Slamos

01:20>> here

01:21>> and Mark Kish

01:22>> here.

01:23>> Um unfortunately today we do not have uh

01:27land coordinator with us. Um we will

01:31proceed.

01:32>> Um please take notice that everyone who

01:35wishes to speak on the matter before us

01:37tonight needs to fill and sign in the

01:39signing sheet up front. Um and then

01:42please note that each vote taken in this

01:45meeting will be conducted by roll call

01:46tonight. And um please note that this

01:50meeting is also being recorded by Auburn

01:52Cable Television.

01:54Um and if there's anyone remote um

01:57please state your name and anyone in

01:59person, please state your name and the

02:01address you are from as well. Um, I'm

02:04going to call the matter uh call the

02:08matter in this list on the agenda for 7

02:11PM applicant Matthew Dole with Brandic

02:15Realy Group 2 LLC for the notice of the

02:18attempt of the purchase of a new

02:19commercial building with Dunkin Donuts

02:21with a drive-through food service and

02:25convenience store at 481 Washington

02:28Street. Um, can I get a motion open? I'm

02:31negoti

02:39all

02:42>> in favor say I.

02:44>> I.

02:44>> I.

02:45>> I.

02:46>> And it's a go.

02:49Anyone for

02:51>> Hi. I'm Rob Brona. Um, Brandon Realy

02:53Group 2. Um Patrick will run through all

02:58the details, but in general what we're

03:00doing is buying this uh basically a

03:02brown field which is in the actual

03:05protection zone. Uh it's got a wetland

03:07behind it, very irregularly shaped lot

03:10uh walking. We've done this before with

03:13other petroleum companies. We made a

03:15deal with Getty Petroleum which is the

03:18my understanding this is sitting area.

03:20It's publicly traded. uh they're very

03:23worried about uh they're the deep pocket

03:25about liability. So, what they've done,

03:28and we've done this before, but old gas

03:30stations, the lots are too small,

03:32antiquated. Um, we'll buy them, we'll

03:36get all our permits. If we get them

03:37within a certain period of time, then

03:39they will come in and do the

03:40remediation. They'll hire their LSP.

03:43They demand that they control that

03:44process. They also deed restrict

03:46property so that we don't do excavation.

03:49We can have a basement, it's going to be

03:50a slab with a vapor barrier under it. um

03:54can't be used for outdoor recreation,

03:56daycare, medical facility, anything like

03:58that. Um they also require that if

04:02there's any other kind of environmental

04:04contamination or any other like DEB acts

04:06or the town acts, they have the right to

04:09come back in and they may knock down our

04:11building if they need to. That's

04:12something we had to agree. Um, but our

04:16experience over multiple sites is that

04:18this cleans up the neighborhood, creates

04:21a brand new building as opposed to what

04:23was an eyesore before. Um, and again,

04:27particularly in a an environmentally

04:29sensitive area, it's a benefit to the

04:31community to do it. Um, and again,

04:34there's a wetland right on this

04:35property, too. Um, and and it is

04:38contaminated. There's a D file on it.

04:41Um, and I know there were questions

04:44Getty realy. I spoke to the person we're

04:46dealing with here, Wall Street people.

04:47They weren't going to come with them.

04:49But they did send an email and they

04:51respond to the peer review saying,

04:52"Well, no, we're not going to leave the

04:55tanks in place and fill them with

04:56gravel. We're removing them and we're

04:58going to remove any contaminated soil

04:59that the LSP finds that we find." and

05:03they won't turn it back over to us till

05:06uh the town of Auburn and uh D clear

05:10because as you know the fire department

05:11has to observe the tanks being removed.

05:14They have to be manifested. They have to

05:15dispose the property properly. Um we've

05:18done this ourselves through a site we

05:20own in Kelly Square in Worcester. Um and

05:24and it worked pretty well and DP is I

05:27mean they're on it. There's somebody

05:28there. Um the city had somebody there in

05:31Worcester. Um, and in the other states

05:34where we've done it, it's every state

05:36has a little bit different requirement,

05:38but all goes pretty much the same way.

05:40Uh, we will end up presuming we get we

05:43get our permits and we close with a

05:46clean site or a much cleaner site at

05:48that respect. Uh, as determined by the

05:51town. That's the general overview. If if

05:54there aren't any more questions, I'll

05:56turn it over to Patrick. Um, you did

05:58make a comment in regards of you're not

06:01allowed to use the site for daycare,

06:03medical, and something else.

06:07Why could you use it for food?

06:10Why could it be used for like open

06:11source food like Dunkin Donuts purposes,

06:14but not those other things? Because the

06:16food's not nothing's going to deal with

06:19ground and that's going to take place on

06:22an impervious surface in a building

06:25that's monitored by the health

06:26department

06:28>> where kids could go outside

06:30or kids could go outside, right? Like a

06:33daycare, the kids could go outside and

06:35play,

06:35>> right? You get into dirt and digging

06:38things like that.

06:39>> It's the no digging.

06:41>> Yeah. Got it. because um we are

06:43increasing the impervious surface but a

06:46lot of it we can't get near because of

06:48the buffers. There will still be

06:51dirt, mud,

06:53>> y

06:55from the board.

06:57>> You just said you're increasing the

06:58impervious service. I thought there was

07:00a net decrease in service. Am I wrong

07:02about that?

07:03>> No, I I can get into that during my

07:05discussion of this model. essentially

07:07doubling the

07:08>> Okay, I guess I'm fixing that up.

07:11>> But we're also adding extensive storm

07:13water management, but there's none there

07:15now.

07:15>> Okay,

07:18>> any other questions from the board?

07:19Mark,

07:22Michelle, anyone from the audience?

07:30Mr. Chair, for the record, I'm Patrick

07:31Healey. I'm the civil engineer for the

07:33project. I'm vice president of Thompson

07:35Listing Associates in Boilston. So,

07:38we've been working with Brandon Realy

07:41for 25 odd years now on multiple sites.

07:44So, we have, you know, experience with

07:46their Dunkin Donuts, the drive-thru

07:48needs, the parking needs, the peak hours

07:50of demand, and all that kind of thing.

07:52We typically work with the consulting

07:54traffic engineer, which in this case was

07:56Kimborn Associates, McFale. Um, so we've

08:01worked with them. We've also worked with

08:03Gddard Consulting, Hello City.

08:05>> Sorry, could I pause you for one second?

08:06>> Yes.

08:06>> So, we need to turn this off for

08:18>> So, we worked with Goddard Consulting

08:20LLC. They were the uh the wetland

08:23scientists who delineated the wetland.

08:26They they have the vast experience with

08:28that as well. Um, so the site we're

08:30looking at here is at the corner of

08:32Washington Street and Elm Street. I know

08:34you saw this at a previous hearing. So

08:36the impervious areas now are pretty much

08:38the front quarter of the site and in the

08:41proposed condition there'll be more

08:43impervious here.

08:55So, it'll be a about a 6,000 square foot

08:58building, parking lot with the

09:00drive-thru lane coming around the

09:02building this way and uh storm water

09:04system under the rear portion of the

09:07parking lot here and a smaller system in

09:09here. So, as this as the building will

09:12be laid out, it'll be higher than

09:14Washington Street. So, there'll be a

09:16high point right about in here. So,

09:18everything from here back goes to the

09:20rear storm water system. small portion

09:22of the site similar to what's there

09:24today will now go to a storm water

09:27treatment collection infiltration system

09:29which doesn't exist today. Right now it

09:31all just runs off into the state

09:33highway.

09:34So um we had a peer review conducted by

09:37Graves Engineering. Uh I saw a couple of

09:40you looking at that when I walked in. So

09:42this week we did provide a a full

09:44response to Graves Engineering going

09:47through their uh comments point by

09:49point. So, I would just like to

09:51summarize some of the things that they

09:52asked for and how we addressed it.

09:55Emergency contact information has been

09:57added to the plan.

09:59Uh, we don't have building plans at this

10:01point. Those will be designed after the

10:03permits are received.

10:05Um, we have added a freestanding sign

10:08onto the plan which wasn't shown

10:10previously. That's here in front of the

10:12site.

10:18We've provided truck turning exhibits

10:20showing how large trucks can come into

10:22the site, service the uh dumpster at the

10:25back or make deliveries and then exit

10:27the site. So the way this is designed is

10:29the two curb cuts on Washington Street

10:32Route 20 are right in only and right out

10:34only. So any traffic that wants to go to

10:37Helm Street either north or south or to

10:40Washington Street West would have to use

10:42the existing curb cut here on Helm

10:44Street. So the way the traffic, you

10:47know, calculations and projections are

10:49made, 80% of the traffic comes in here

10:52and out here. There's a small amount

10:54that goes the other way. The site is uh

10:57arranged so that it can take the once a

10:59week tractor trailer deliveries at the

11:01rear of the site. that that truck would

11:03come in here, go around the

11:05drive-through lane, and go out. Those t

11:07those uh deliveries are typically made

11:09at off peak hours. So, they're not

11:11showing up between, you know, 7 and 9:00

11:13a.m. when the drive-thru is the busiest.

11:18um at the infiltration system at the

11:20front of the site. Um given that the

11:23area is still protected by that D

11:26consent order, we were not allowed to

11:28conduct soil test pits in the front of

11:30the site for that infiltration system.

11:33We would ask that that be made a

11:34condition of approval. Graves

11:36Engineering understands the conditions

11:38under which you know we're held and is

11:40satisfied that that could be done prior

11:42to installation. The real issue here is

11:44not the type of soil since we're in a

11:47groundwater, you know, contributing

11:49area. It's all sand deposit. The real

11:51issue for us is the separation of that

11:53infiltration to groundwater. So, we

11:55would have to conduct a test after that

11:57cleanup is conducted to determine the

11:59seasonal high groundwater elevation so

12:02we can appropriately site the or confirm

12:05that we have adequate separation

12:07[clears throat] from the infiltration

12:08system to the ground.

12:10So the test pit that you did form was in

12:13the back.

12:14>> We did test pits in the rear of the

12:15seven test.

12:16>> And the test pit the D is referring to

12:19is what you just described for the

12:21front. It's a contaminated area.

12:27So the test pits that we did conduct are

12:30here, here, and here.

12:32>> Mhm.

12:33>> And we have not tested in this area. So

12:35because that entire paved area is part

12:38of that, you know, use limitation, we're

12:40not allowed to do that until after the

12:43cleanup has been conducted.

12:45>> So you're looking for that to be as

12:47condition.

12:47>> I would suggest that would be an

12:48appropriate condition.

12:58I think the the email from getting

13:01petroleum or leus covers the next entry

13:04which is specific to the underground

13:06storage tank removal and process um

13:09involved in that where there was some

13:12misunderstanding of the notes that we

13:14had that the tanks would be filled with

13:16crush stone. That's not the case. The

13:18tanks have to be fully removed,

13:20inspected, nearly soil tested and all

13:22that and then be placed with either wash

13:24film or clean fill in those excavated

13:27areas. So we clarified that with the

13:30revised

13:37uh we've added a construction sequence

13:39to one of the plans here.

13:42Um it's important we've done a number of

13:45projects where Graves is a review

13:46engineer. So although we have these

13:48things in the documents, they like to

13:50open to the current sheet so there's no

13:53confusion on the contractor's part when

13:54they show up in sequences on the plan

13:58sheet. So, we've added a sheet to the

13:59plan set that shows that

14:03uh Grapes has reviewed our hydrarology

14:05and storm water report and found that

14:07we've adequately addressed the um DNP

14:10storm water standards and the town of

14:12Auburn specific standard relative to

14:14phosphorus removal. So we still after we

14:17receive approval from the planning board

14:19conservation commission, we still have

14:21to get that storm water permit from the

14:23Auburn DPW for the major uh site

14:27disturbance permit and they will again

14:29review our calculations at that point to

14:31verify that we adequately address the

14:34town standards.

14:38Uh we added some notes to the plan

14:40showing which drain structures have the

14:43storm sector pre-treatment devices in

14:45them.

14:57So specifically there's there's one

14:59structure before this infiltration

15:01system and one before this infiltration

15:03system. So the one in the front here,

15:06the the catch basins actually are great

15:08inlet storm water treatment units. So

15:11they not only provide separation of

15:12floatables, they also help us with our

15:15TSS removal. And in the back there are

15:18two catch basins that come into a common

15:20uh TSS removal pre-treatment device

15:23prior to the infiltration the subsurface

15:25system. So the way this these systems

15:28are designed,

15:30they can handle everything too,

15:31including a 50-year storm. So there

15:33would be some overflow discharge from

15:35larger storms. So say you would get up

15:37to six inches of rainfall that would be

15:39fully contained from the impervious

15:41areas in those infiltration systems and

15:44then beyond dock there would be some

15:45overflow. So in the front that would

15:48overflow this catch basin into the state

15:50highway and in the rear there's a

15:52there's an overflow pipe here that comes

15:53up to a head. So the way this is

15:56situated it's at the very top of that

15:59sort of storm water box that's

16:00underground. So only when the system

16:02gets up to a certain level would there

16:04be discharge from that.

16:10There was a question about sight

16:11distance here at the driveway because

16:13there is a there's a fence on the

16:15Abutters property. So our traffic

16:17consultant confirmed that a car at the

16:20stop line 8 ft from the gutter of the

16:22existing street does have over 400 ft of

16:25set distance in this other direction. So

16:28that's not a restriction. Uh as far as

16:30traffic safety,

16:33we adjusted one of the parking spaces

16:35for the wheelchair accessible vans

16:38and um added a a detail to show how that

16:43um ramp system gets to the sidewalk.

16:47And we've added some notes

16:48differentiating the types of curbs on

16:50the site. So, there is some granite

16:52curbing around the inside loop of the

16:54building up against the sidewalks and

16:56the drive-thru lane. And then there's

16:58buminous curb outside loop. And then

17:01there's some granite curbs here right at

17:03the curb cuts from the state highway.

17:05Because this is on a state highway,

17:07we're subject to mass DOT standards. You

17:09have to apply to mass DOT for change of

17:12use and alteration of those curb cuts.

17:14So, that all has to meet the state of

17:16curb cut standards. You applied for

17:18that?

17:20>> I'm sorry. Have you applied for those

17:21curve cuts?

17:22>> I can't do that until we have all local

17:23permits and needs

17:26and then we added on the previous plan

17:29some widths to the side

17:31to clarify.

17:33So I think we've adequately addressed

17:35the gate graves engineering uh peer

17:37review. I expect they will issue a

17:39letter back to their planning department

17:41acknowledging that prior to the next

17:43planning board meeting.

17:45Um, on sheet C3, you have uh these

17:48rectangular squares with numbers on

17:51them. I'm assuming that's the elevation

17:52of the pavement.

17:54>> Yes, these are the proposed grades.

17:56>> Yep. It seems that the elevation changes

17:58as it gets closer to the neighbors

18:00homes.

18:02Is it a possibility to have the water

18:04flow flow a different direction in that?

18:08>> So, this this neighbor's home actually

18:09sits higher than our parking lot. So

18:11there will be a slope coming down from

18:13the neighbors lot into our parking lot

18:15here. And then we have the catch basins

18:17here to collect that runoff.

18:19So for example, if you were here, the

18:21elevation is 524

18:24at the neighbor's property. And our the

18:26low point of our catch basin is 522.5.

18:30So it's a foot and a half.

18:35>> Okay.

18:36Is there any plan for snow snow removal

18:40or what you're going to be doing with

18:42them?

18:42>> Yes, we have designated a couple of

18:44areas on the site plan for snow removal

18:46or snow storage. I know DP had a comment

18:51about that. We had snow storage here on

18:54that slope that I was talking about

18:55where that would melt and come down into

18:57the parking lot, but there is another

18:59area here that's kind of off the edge of

19:01the pavement. you know, we would have to

19:04not have that according to what DP is

19:06saying and we'd have to remove any

19:08excess snow that doesn't fit in this

19:10area where we can melt it and get it

19:12into this formal treatment system. So we

19:15would be open to condition the

19:17permission ceasef to to put that

19:20as one of our uh conditions of approval

19:23stating that the snow area cannot melt

19:26and run off directly to the wetland that

19:28if large storms create snow such that it

19:31can't be stored rather be removed from

19:33the property done that in other strain

19:36sites.

19:40I think there was one other comment that

19:42DDP had made in it um

19:45file

19:47was

19:59any other comments from the board?

20:02>> Um I have a question. Um, so I know that

20:05there is the stipulation with the bill

20:07of sale about the 90 days that you have

20:10to get the permit. When does that clock

20:14run out?

20:16>> Well, sometime in October.

20:20>> Do you know early in October or late?

20:23>> I don't know the exact date right now. I

20:24don't have the contract.

20:26>> Okay. Just curious what

20:28>> we have.

20:28>> And is that getting like permits like

20:30from all like that's

20:32>> all three boards

20:33>> the land use boards not the specific

20:35like street opening permits card those

20:37those are specific

20:39just approval for the use and the storm

20:42water system. conservation commission

20:44planning and

20:46>> zoning board of appeals for the for

20:47[clears throat] the drive-thru uh use

20:49for the

20:50>> two special permits and a varian

20:53just those final three

20:54>> those are three permits we're looking to

20:56get by the dead

20:57>> and they seemed my opinion um the ZBA

21:02seemed amendable to granting them but

21:06they had advertised only one of the

21:08things we're asking for instead of all

21:09three sort of abundance of caution and

21:12due process process they wanted to

21:14continue and readvertise. So that's

21:16where we all

21:17>> right. Yep. And from my understanding

21:19yesterday because of that planning board

21:22wants to wait for the next meeting as

21:24well.

21:24>> Right. Understood. And that still falls

21:27within our time frame so we can work

21:29with you.

21:30>> So our board of appeals meeting is right

21:32on the 17th.

21:34>> 17th

21:34>> September 17th

21:36>> and then we'll go back to the planning

21:37board on the 22nd. Y

21:39>> hopefully wrap everything up.

21:41So these are the additional comments

21:43that I got from DP. So one was asking

21:46about the roof composition. So we expect

21:48this is going to be a membrane roof, not

21:50a metal roof. So that should alleviate

21:52the concerns about what type of metal it

21:54is and whether pre-treatment is

21:56necessary.

21:58And then um

22:00they questioned our worksheets for the

22:02credit on the TSS removal efficiency.

22:05Um, but as you know, the town of Auburn

22:07has a stricter TSS removal level and the

22:11total phosphorus removal uh percentages.

22:13The D doesn't have any standards. I

22:16would defer to the town storm water

22:17engineer to confirm that we meet the

22:19standards on that. Reeves has been

22:21satisfied with what we provided. We

22:24provided, you know, our typical D

22:26spreadsheet showing how the TLS is

22:28calculated. uh but they were asking for

22:31a separate calculation of pre-treatment

22:34versus overall treatment. We think

22:36that's covered by our spreadsheet since

22:38that's how we always do it using their

22:40prescribed method. So it's you know kind

22:43of surprised to get a comment from DP.

22:46So we're not following the procedure and

22:49is a very clearly laid out procedure in

22:52the handbook that I'm required to do to

22:54show storm water compliance.

23:00And then the other one was that uh same

23:02test pit question that we raised making

23:04that a condition of approval for the

23:06confirmed confirmatory test pit and the

23:09uh snow storage.

23:13So the commission's open to having those

23:15two items as in special conditions.

23:18We're certainly open to having them.

23:22I'd be happy to answer any questions.

23:26Any

23:28questions from any more questions from

23:30the board

23:32audience?

23:37Um

23:39I will have to say I'm not the normal

23:41chair so I'm not confident enough to

23:44finalize this. You did answer all of our

23:47questions and Grace has come back with a

23:51lot of comments. Um, but because we're

23:53waiting for ZVA and our head chair is

23:55usually more talented than I am, if you

23:58guys don't mind if we wait till the next

23:59meeting,

24:00>> which is the next

24:02>> the 23rd, I believe, which is the day

24:04after planning board. So, should be

24:07>> September 23rd.

24:08>> Yeah.

24:11>> All right. Can I get a motion to have

24:15I guess the Dunkin Donuts move to

24:18September 23rd? Uh, I make a motion that

24:20we continue the hearing for 481

24:22Washington Street to uh September 23rd.

24:27>> Yes.

24:27>> At 7 p.m.

24:29>> Yes.

24:31>> Okay. I have a second.

24:32>> I'll second that.

24:34>> All those in favor?

24:35>> I I

24:37>> All right.

24:37>> Thank you, Mr. Chair.

24:39>> We have a draft order of conditions

24:41written prior to that meeting.

24:43>> I'm sorry.

24:44>> Would you expect to have a draft order

24:46of conditions prior to that meeting?

24:48Who drafted that that meeting?

24:51>> We drafted it at the meeting. I I just

24:52haven't been here so I don't know how

24:53you

24:54>> Yeah, we usually do it.

24:57>> Assuming that Yeah. Like the most of the

24:59questions have been answered which I

25:00feel like you've answered most of our

25:02questions. Then we we do it that

25:04evening.

25:04>> That that evening we do the order

25:06condition. You could have it that next

25:08day, right?

25:09>> So you would have the 24th.

25:11>> Yeah. Roughly.

25:11>> Do you want us to do a draft for you?

25:15>> I don't think so. Yeah. No, you're

25:17right.

25:18>> Sometimes don't have staff. So,

25:19>> that's okay.

25:22>> N's not here tonight because she had to

25:24go home sick. You're catching us on a

25:25bed. [laughter]

25:29>> Her chairman's her chairman's on

25:31vacation. Natt went home sick. Yeah,

25:33it's been a day. So, yeah.

25:35>> Thanks for your time. Thank you. Thank

25:37you.

25:38>> Thank you.

25:41rate.

25:45Next order of business updates on

25:48environmental consultant for for

25:5347 Rock and Road. Um

25:58I don't have any update on that. You

26:00guys

26:00>> I don't have an update unless Nat had

26:02one button.

26:05Um

26:05>> I don't think I saw anything in the

26:08thing in my note. Nope.

26:12>> Would anyone in the audience have No.

26:15>> Nope. All right. I'm not No, I guess

26:18with uh touch grace.

26:19>> I was just going to say like if you guys

26:21>> did you guys get did you get notified by

26:24anybody at D?

26:26>> Yeah. Neither did we like unless

26:29>> we haven't heard anything since June

26:3011th. So we had a walk around.

26:32>> Okay.

26:33>> We expected that because that she told

26:36us it might take three, four, five

26:37months,

26:38>> right? But our concern tonight was at

26:43couple meetings back through the chair,

26:47>> he suggested getting an outside

26:49consultant to help the property owner

26:53stabilize the parking lot in the

26:55driveway that came down the side. And my

26:58question is, has somebody been hired? We

27:00have been we've gone through what four I

27:04know Nat has

27:06tried to contact at least four different

27:08consultants.

27:10>> They have not either responded or said

27:13that they have had a conflict of

27:15interest. Actually, two of them have

27:17said they had a conflict of interest.

27:19Um, one didn't respond and the other one

27:23I think retired. I don't know if Nat has

27:27reached out to anybody else or if she

27:31has been able to contact anybody or I

27:35don't know what the status of that is

27:38and um Nat's not here. So, I can't speak

27:42to that one way or the other. The last I

27:45knew that was the status on that and I

27:47know that Nat was actively working on

27:49it. Um we couldn't get anybody. I don't

27:54know if that's because it was summer.

27:56Um, but that's where we are.

28:00>> Who have we used in the past for similar

28:02situations?

28:03>> What was her name that I I believe um

28:11I believe she's retired and she was the

28:14one that hasn't responded. Um,

28:17>> are you talking about the town engineer?

28:19>> No, no, no. The wetland scientist. Um,

28:22the consultant. I can't remember her

28:25name.

28:29>> Emily.

28:29>> I don't know.

28:30>> That came up last.

28:32>> Oh, maybe it's not Emily. Hold on. Maybe

28:35it's in our notes. Hold on one second.

28:39>> I know. It's Walsh injured.

28:43>> I Walsh, I believe, is the one that said

28:45that they had a conflict, but they have

28:48a

28:48>> conflict. Yeah, they were.

28:57Does anybody have any other notes?

29:00>> No.

29:02>> There might be a notes.

29:25At that same meeting, everybody's

29:27talking about hiring a consultant and

29:29all. Later on, it was mentioned that

29:33this had to be done within 7 days.

29:37Destabilization of the parking lot and

29:40the surrounding driveway, the 10 back

29:42behind it. They were going to do the

29:44weren't they going to do the

29:45stabilization?

29:46>> Well, they they started to do something

29:49themselves,

29:50not a professional engineering firm or

29:53the land surveyor

29:55and the first time around my property

29:58got inundated with the money.

30:00>> We saw that.

30:01>> Yeah,

30:02>> that's actually these notes right here.

30:05Um,

30:11>> it was my understanding that they

30:12couldn't proceed on the construction of

30:15the project because of

30:19>> whatever you guys put in place.

30:22>> And I think I could be wrong, but I

30:25think you guys were supposed to kind of

30:28figure out what the appeal was

30:30officially for

30:32because as far as Well,

30:34>> I you guys filed the appeal and then I

30:37believe you stated that it wasn't to

30:39stop um conservation from doing what we

30:43needed to do was for something else, but

30:45it seems there was some discrepancy with

30:48that.

30:48>> Okay, I'm just going to read this real

30:50quick.

30:52Mr. Garland informed Mr. Daly that the

30:54source of the issues cannot be addressed

30:56because of the appeal. The enforcement

30:59order is asking for a temporary fix to

31:01the erosion concern while the appeal is

31:03still pending. The commission does not

31:06have answers on how long the D will take

31:09to process the appeal or what D will do

31:13regarding the appeal. At the time at the

31:16time, all the commission can do is keep

31:18an eye on the situation. Mr. Garland

31:21stated that the applicant has been asked

31:24to implement a temporary fix. stated the

31:27applicant has been asked to implement a

31:30temporary fix. So

31:35yes, we have asked the applicant. So if

31:38they are attempting

31:42themselves to fix it, that's what we've

31:46asked them to do that they're doing what

31:48we've asked them to do.

31:51Um

31:53>> they did some work right after that

31:57meeting.

31:57>> Okay. Then that's what they were

31:59supposed to do.

32:00>> It failed.

32:01>> Okay.

32:01>> That's why this is continuing on.

32:03>> Correct. I believe the issue is

32:07they need the appeal to be removed so

32:09they can actually do the work that's

32:11supposed to permanently fix this. That's

32:13what they said.

32:15>> True.

32:16>> No, I'm sorry. That's not what we were

32:18told. Well, it says attorney B clarified

32:21the project had gotten the OC appeal

32:24caused the the whole process to fault

32:27until the D gives then a direct order to

32:31continue. The appeal would have to be

32:33withdrawn for the project to go forward.

32:35Until then, temporary measures are in

32:38place to stop the erosion from entering

32:40the wetland.

32:42This is this is the meeting minutes from

32:46June 24th, 2026. And I believe you

32:49wasn't present during that meeting.

32:51>> You were not present for that meeting.

32:53You you two were.

32:54>> Yeah.

32:57>> The way we Well, I shouldn't say we the

32:59way I understood that was that they were

33:01told by the D

33:03that when they did the walk, they

33:05couldn't touch any of the other

33:06property. They couldn't do anything else

33:08on that property except for

33:12parking lot in the back by Mr.

33:14Chandler's job. At that meeting, uh, the

33:17town sent him an order saying that he

33:19had to do the work within seven days. At

33:22that meeting, Mr. Garland, I believe,

33:24said that he have to do the work. At

33:27Tony Bro said, "We're not doing the work

33:29until the appeal is dropped.

33:33>> They can't do the work until the shop."

33:36>> They could they can do that one of the

33:41>> the temporary.

33:42>> I don't know. I wasn't at the I I All I

33:44know is that Nat said when she was here

33:47that the um DP person got very

33:53um

33:56closed off and was only working with you

33:59at that point and Nat.

34:01>> Is that correct? That's correct.

34:02>> Okay. All right.

34:04And so I don't know what was said

34:06between you and Nat and the D person and

34:10I don't remember her name.

34:13>> So I I don't know. But at this point we

34:16can we can go back and forth and we can

34:19do everything that we can to go back to

34:21them and ask them if they can try and

34:23stabilize that because I want that

34:25wetland protected just like you do. So

34:28that that's what I want. We all at this

34:31board volunteer our time every other

34:34Wednesday to try and make sure that the

34:36wetlands are protected for the people in

34:38Auburn. So I appreciate you coming in

34:41and letting us know that that isn't

34:43protected. So we are going to go and ask

34:46them to pri try and protect that better.

34:49So we will go and do that. Okay. Okay.

34:52>> Can I just explain what happened on that

34:54day? Sure. The walkthrough.

34:55>> Yes.

34:57So the three of us were invited by the

34:59DP to go through the walkthrough.

35:01>> Mhm.

35:01>> Two people from the town who were

35:04unwanted by us.

35:06>> Okay.

35:07>> Showed up

35:08>> and kind of caused a little trouble. So

35:11that's when she said, "I'm only taking

35:13one, Mr. Ch."

35:15>> I get it.

35:15>> So that's what happened.

35:16>> All right.

35:18All right. But I appreciate I do

35:20appreciate what you're doing. I I

35:22totally get it. But and we all have had

35:26frustrations with

35:30neighbors and things that have happened

35:32within our neighborhoods. I get it. And

35:35we'll do everything that we can to

35:37protect that wetland. I promise you

35:39that.

35:40>> How did the Walsh engineering explain

35:43that they might have a

35:44>> I don't know if I'm I don't quote me on

35:46Walsh. I know that it was two. I know

35:49that it was two. I don't know if it was

35:51I don't know who it was.

35:53>> I don't know the specifics.

35:54>> I don't know the specifics. So, do not

35:56quote me on Wall. I don't know. I do not

35:58know if it was Walsh. I don't I know

36:01that it was two that said that they had

36:03a conflict of interest. I don't know

36:04which two it was.

36:06>> Right. And we could we could check with

36:07N as far as defenders list.

36:10>> She she will be better suited to answer

36:13that question than I will.

36:15>> I I don't have the answer.

36:17>> I have notes here. I think Walsh was

36:19originally hired by his town

36:22>> to do a review of the project.

36:24>> Okay.

36:25>> I have this.

36:26>> Okay.

36:26>> That's where the conflict is.

36:28>> Yeah.

36:28>> Yeah.

36:28>> This is from almost a year ago.

36:31>> So maybe they can't do what

36:35>> that a little bit.

36:41>> One last thing. We know that you're

36:42trying.

36:43>> Okay.

36:43>> Okay. Okay.

36:44>> We we don't

36:46>> we don't think that way at all. Okay.

36:48Okay.

36:49>> That's all.

36:50>> We are we're doing the best we can.

36:52Okay.

36:57>> Will this discussion be carried over to

36:59your next meeting?

37:01>> Yes.

37:05>> Nat's not here and she was part of that

37:07meeting.

37:08>> We will be able to speak when you get

37:10back after everybody's vacation is.

37:12>> Yeah.

37:13>> It's on September 23rd.

37:15>> Okay.

37:16She'll be able to speak to it better

37:17than we can because we didn't do it.

37:21>> Okay.

37:22>> Thank you.

37:22>> All right. Thank you.

37:23>> Thank you. Good luck.

37:26>> Good night. Thank you.

37:32>> I guess discussion DP project review.

37:36>> See, I think Greg Roto is with DPW.

37:40>> Oh.

37:40>> Oh,

37:40>> DPW.

37:44Good evening.

37:45>> Good evening.

37:46>> Nice to see everyone again. Yes.

37:47>> I'm Pete Boria. I'm the assistant DPW

37:50director and sewer superintendent and

37:52with us online is Greg Roto, town

37:54engineer.

37:54>> And this is in in regards of the whole

37:57street scenario or is for something

37:59else?

37:59>> No, this is for your agenda item of the

38:01DPW discussion.

38:03>> Plank conditions.

38:05>> I'm sorry.

38:08>> Conditions. I think this

38:09>> that wasn't the agenda item. It was just

38:11a discussion. Is it

38:13>> about how we can be better aligned? Is

38:16that

38:16>> it says DPW project review procedures?

38:20>> Yeah.

38:20>> So is that I think some of our

38:22discussion at the last meeting was about

38:25you know future projects that

38:27>> could have um impact on wetlands and

38:30stuff and to give us a heads up or if

38:34you guys need to do anything above and

38:36beyond your standard conditions.

38:38>> Sure. So, as we're talking about it

38:40internally, we're looking at two

38:42parallel tracks. One is for small road

38:45maintenance projects that our own DPW

38:48personnel will do themselves. And those

38:52smaller again road maintenance items

38:55will be done hopefully when our blanket

38:57order is reinstated. And if we can

39:00discuss that at the next meeting, that'd

39:01be great. Uh we have the um current

39:05order with the activities under that and

39:08we'd like to [clears throat] kind of

39:09discuss those and maybe make some

39:11changes so it's more reflective of what

39:13we currently do today. And for the

39:16bigger projects that we have to go out

39:18to bid for we found or we've discussed

39:21and we think the cleanest way for us to

39:22approach that is to do an RDA with you

39:26before we go out to bid. That way there

39:28we know if it rises to the level of

39:31needing a notice of intent so that we

39:33don't bid a project and then have it

39:35stall while we wait for that notice of

39:37intent process. So we'll go ahead and

39:40submit the RDAU with the with the

39:43project scope of work. we won't

39:45necessarily have an erosion control plan

39:48or a SWIP because that will be part of

39:50the contract bid documents that the um

39:53the the winning contractor will have to

39:55provide before they get a notice to

39:57proceed. So, what we've been working on

39:59is a standard operating procedure for us

40:01internally that kind of spells out the

40:04steps for us to do that with you. So,

40:06it's a checklist item. It's step by step

40:09of what we're going to do to make sure

40:11that for the bigger scale projects that

40:14we use a subcontractor for such as you

40:17know full depth reclamation, mill and

40:18pave or any type of road work that

40:21happens within resource area. We'll put

40:23the bid documents together before we go

40:26out to bid. We'll file and we'll do the

40:27RDA. will come in front of you, let you

40:30know the areas that we're going to be

40:31working on, and then let you know.

40:34Again, the awarding contractor will

40:36prepare a SWIP under their NIFTY's

40:38permit and an erosion control plan that

40:40will be submitted to you before any type

40:42of notice to proceed for them to to

40:45start work will take place. And again,

40:48hopefully when we discuss that in the

40:50future, we weren't we didn't provide any

40:52of that tonight because that wasn't

40:54really what the agenda item mentioned,

40:55but um we're ready. We have two RDAs on

40:59your next meeting. If we could ask that

41:02to add another item to reinstate the

41:04blanket order that we previously had

41:07with maybe some adjustments to reflect

41:09our current activities. Then also talk

41:12about the SOP that we're preparing for

41:15um external subcontracted bid work.

41:19Hopefully you guys find that um

41:22amendable to to where we currently are

41:24and the best way to move forward.

41:31>> That's great.

41:32>> Yeah,

41:32>> I think so too.

41:33>> Fantastic.

41:34>> Yeah, I think that sounds good.

41:36>> Yeah.

41:37>> Excellent.

41:37>> Yeah.

41:38>> Thank you.

41:40Um, a question I will have for I guess

41:44for Mike when he gets back.

41:48So, reinstating,

41:52can the blanket order of conditions be

41:56reinstated [snorts]

41:58or does it actually procedurally require

42:00a new notice of intent in order for us

42:04to reinstate it? like does DPW

42:10>> have to apply

42:12this? This is a question I don't know.

42:14Do they have to file a new notice of

42:16intent? Cuz

42:18>> that's something. So, I'm just putting

42:20that out there. There is like I think a

42:21question that needs to be answered.

42:23>> I think that it would have to be

42:24reapplied for because I think that that

42:26was a blanket for everything. I think

42:28that we would have to put addition or we

42:30could reinstate it with additional

42:33>> I think the billate the blanket with the

42:36additional comments that we have.

42:37>> Yeah.

42:39>> But you're looking for some adjustments

42:41to do. We

42:42>> we're looking

42:42>> You all have the copy some changes. We

42:45have a copy of the current blanket order

42:47that we'll provide to you with some

42:49highlighted items that maybe we don't we

42:51don't necessarily need under there or

42:53that we don't utilize

42:54>> and maybe some different terms again

42:57that we currently use that'll be

42:59beneficial as far as applying for a new

43:02notice of intent. That would mean we'd

43:04have to start the process over, get a

43:06new D number and and pretty much do that

43:09all over again, which fortunately

43:11>> it's going to be months or weeks or

43:13whatever.

43:14>> Yeah. So

43:15>> that's not something I'm saying I want

43:16to happen. I just, you know, sometimes

43:18the red tape gets

43:20>> hopefully Mike and Nat can clarify that

43:23before we come back for your next

43:25meeting.

43:25>> I would hope that you could just

43:27>> adjust the existing.

43:30>> That's what it

43:32>> That'd be great. Amend it. And if you

43:34want to add a couple um conditions with

43:37it,

43:38>> is that blank available anywhere to see

43:41ahead of time?

43:42>> It's recorded, but yes. So I we're going

43:44to try and get you in again if you're if

43:47you're amendable to that course of

43:49action, we will get you copies of that

43:52blanket order with some highlighted

43:53items and stuff well before your meeting

43:55for that to share with you so you can

43:57>> that could be email package. Yes.

43:59>> Yeah. We'll get it like through here.

44:01>> That would be awesome.

44:01>> Yeah.

44:02>> Yeah.

44:02>> Yes.

44:06>> From my understanding the blanket order

44:08condition was for all the major

44:09projects.

44:10>> It was for all projects.

44:12>> All projects. Okay, it's a little

44:15confusing I guess.

44:16>> And then now now we are trying to adjust

44:19it a little bit so that it works better.

44:21But yet you guys will still come forward

44:22to in front of us with an RDA

44:26>> for the larger

44:27>> for the larger

44:28>> larger projects. Yes, we'll cover in

44:30front of before we go out to bid.

44:32>> Got it.

44:32>> And the blanket

44:34>> funny. Sorry.

44:36>> Yeah, I was just going to say the

44:37blanket order would cover the smaller

44:39project. Is that blanket or will cover

44:41the I'll call it roadway maintenance. We

44:43don't do any full depth reclamation on

44:44our own. We don't do any mill and pave.

44:47We don't the biggest thing we're doing

44:48is maybe a cross culvert. We're not

44:50doing a big drainage project to be

44:53consistent with what triggers the RDA

44:56and the subcontractor. We could keep it

44:58consistent with a swip where anything um

45:01up to an acre of disturbance. Once you

45:03get over that acre of det disturbance,

45:05it requires a swip to be done. We could

45:08have we could follow that, but I don't

45:10think we're even going to have any

45:11projects that'll come close to that.

45:13Correct, Greg.

45:15>> Yeah, correct. We we we won't be able to

45:17do much um if it's too large of a

45:20project, we're bidding it out.

45:23And that's why I'm trying to really

45:25clarify it to just pair it down to that

45:28roadway maintenance that lets us clean

45:31the catch basins, maybe rebuild the

45:32catch basin, replace a cross culvert, do

45:35the road work, you know, maybe repair

45:37some sidewalks or add some sidewalks in

45:40some small areas that might be in a

45:42resource area that we'll have to again

45:45let Natt know what we're doing. If we

45:47need to provide an an erosion and

45:49control plan for our small project, we

45:51can do that. Do the sitewalk with NAT

45:53before the con, you know, once the

45:55erosion control is in place and just

45:57really get that procedure back back in

45:59place so that we're, you know, we're

46:01working hand in hand through all of

46:03these projects. And then the bigger

46:05projects again will be where the RDAs

46:07are done for that work again before we

46:10go out to bid so that we know when we go

46:13out to bid, we can hit the ground

46:14running after the bids are received. We

46:16don't have to worry about a notice of

46:17intent. But and like I said, we in the

46:20past we've had the SWIP and the erosion

46:22control plan as part of our bid

46:24documents. It might not just have made

46:26its way to you guys where now it will.

46:29>> Okay.

46:30>> I like it.

46:32>> Yeah.

46:33>> Right.

46:35>> Awesome.

46:36>> And again, we'll try and get that to you

46:38fairly soon so you have plenty of time

46:39to redo it for you next week.

46:41>> Yeah.

46:43>> Yeah.

46:43>> 23rd.

46:44>> Great.

46:45>> That's awesome. Thank you. Okay,

46:46perfect. Excellent.

46:48>> Thank you.

46:48>> Thank you all.

46:49>> Thank you.

46:50>> Have a good night.

46:51>> Thanks.

46:51>> Take care everybody.

46:53>> Thank you.

46:56>> All right.

46:58Next thing, um, actually, next thing is

47:01meeting minutes.

47:03I reviewed it. I didn't have any

47:06comments, but also Matt's not here. I

47:09don't know how that works either. that

47:12we should review those meeting minutes

47:14next time she is here.

47:16>> Yeah, I'd say everything is questioned

47:17till next week.

47:18>> We have to vote on that.

47:23>> I don't think we voted on

47:26voted on postponing the approval of the

47:29minutes. I don't think we've ever voted

47:31on that before. [laughter]

47:33>> I was joking

47:35like it was a very informal.

47:38>> Yeah, we voted on accepting it.

47:39>> I was just I was joking. [laughter]

47:42Well, she has them in the packet, but

47:44she doesn't have it on the thing this

47:46year. She doesn't have it on the agenda.

47:48>> Yeah.

47:49>> So, that's really

47:51>> There is an 826 26,

47:56>> right?

47:58No. Um,

48:01>> oh Jesus, I didn't write on your note.

48:05>> We can vote on it.

48:07>> Okay. Can I get a motion to have the

48:10meeting minutes for 82626

48:13moved to September 23rd,

48:162026?

48:20>> I'd say we

48:22I meant we could vote on

48:23>> approving approval.

48:26>> Uh everyone

48:27>> I'm okay with I'm okay with reviewing

48:29them and approving them or amending them

48:31if you all are. I'm I'm still looking at

48:33just a few things.

48:34>> Okay.

48:42is we're we're missing Mike, but we

48:44don't need

48:45>> Are you allowed to approve? Oh, you was

48:47remote. Okay,

48:47>> I'm remote. Yeah. So, we're Are we okay

48:50voting?

48:50>> Yeah, that's

48:52>> you got enough of us. Matt Matt doesn't

48:55vote. Cool.

49:24Thanks.

49:58I don't have

50:05>> anybody need more time or

50:06>> I'm all set. Nope.

50:08>> Okay.

50:09>> Can I get a motion to accept the meeting

50:11minutes of August 26 26? So moved.

50:14>> Second.

50:15>> I'll second.

50:17>> All right. All those in favor?

50:19>> I

50:19>> I

50:30uh I

50:32believe this National Grid Rocklin Road

50:35pole replacement project.

50:38Uh we do have the information on that in

50:41our packets.

50:42Mhm.

50:52>> I will say I am not very informed on how

50:54that procedure happens.

50:56>> Basically, they just let us know.

50:58>> Okay.

51:00>> And there's not a lot we can do about

51:01it. So

51:07>> I have new business. Um

51:11um yesterday at the planning board uh um

51:16there was a project on

51:22510 Washington Street. There's a

51:24commercial property there. I'll pass

51:26this apple truck and trailer. They are

51:30expanding their lot to add some gravel

51:32for some storage outside. It's been

51:34impacting some of the neighbors. has

51:36come back to us on the planning board

51:38side with some issues and they're trying

51:40to get a permit because they were kind

51:42of doing some work without permission.

51:44There's a wetlands directly behind them.

51:47>> Um in 2023 all the trees and wetlands

51:50were intact and as of now most of the

51:53trees are gone and the wetland has been

51:55impacted with gravel, a large amount of

51:58gravel um and some things like that.

52:01There was a wetland consultant who

52:03actually lives on the same street who

52:04was at the meeting yesterday. And again,

52:07the wetlands is not flagged. So, it's

52:10kind of one of those things where we

52:12need, in my opinion, we should get a

52:15um consultant out there to review the

52:18wetlands, see how bad the damage was

52:20done. But it was done. They own it, but

52:25it's it's no longer there. It been

52:28tremendously impacted. Uh,

52:32so here's a

52:36here's a sketch of

52:39this way.

52:42Um, this is Washington Street. This is

52:44the building and there's the wetland

52:46line here. And they want to go past

52:47here. So, they already added the gravel.

52:51And then on this sheet, this is the

52:52before and after.

52:55So you're saying that there's there's

52:58actually like gravel and stuff in the

53:00wetland, not just in the buffer.

53:02>> Cor in the wetland spot.

53:04>> Okay.

53:04>> So they like they filled it either.

53:06>> I believe so.

53:09But again, it's not flagged. So whether

53:11or not it is wetlands, it's kind of

53:16tough to determine how much gravel it

53:19is. It is.

53:22>> Where's that mirror up there?

53:24Huh?

53:25>> What's that? That's a production

53:27company.

53:28>> I'm not 100% sure.

53:31>> The name is

53:32>> a before and after

53:34avenue.

53:40>> So, it seems like I mean very first step

53:43I would think would be like having Nat

53:45go out there

53:47and visit. I don't know. Have she been

53:49looped in on that?

53:50>> She has not. Um, there was a discussion

53:53with someone in conservation was out

53:55there.

53:56>> It was a female. Um, it could have and

53:58the guy said someone named Emily.

54:01>> There's the town engineer, I think. Is

54:03it No, maybe that's Emma.

54:04>> Yeah. Yeah.

54:05>> Emma. I think it might be Emma.

54:07>> I don't know if that's

54:09>> It's a Emma. Emily. It's very close. Uh,

54:12I I didn't recognize the name.

54:14>> Yep.

54:17>> But I just wanted to bring it to you

54:18guys.

54:20Uh this is something we would probably

54:22want to visit also.

54:24>> Yeah.

54:25>> Where is it next to?

54:27>> It's like um it's west of comes just a

54:32little little west on the same side.

54:35>> A little tiny truck in

54:38I've noticed it before.

54:40>> Yep.

54:44>> People go trash all the I just don't get

54:47it.

54:47>> Yeah. like why why

54:52>> all right so I um I believe Rose may

54:55Rose which is a part of the planning

54:57board probably not uh not on a daily so

55:02hopefully she communicated but I'll

55:03email not

55:04>> pass information along

55:08>> all right

55:10do we go try and go out there Saturday

55:12or do you want them go out there

55:17>> I can ask that and then

55:18>> I have like a million things to do on

55:20Saturday.

55:20>> Yeah, I I have a I'm not going there.

55:23>> Okay, good. How about Saturday

55:24afterwards? Maybe

55:26>> maybe the Sunday afterwards or maybe

55:28midweek we can all just do it for

55:32>> um

55:33>> Sunday. I could probably do Sunday.

55:35>> Definitely.

55:37>> I have a witch thing I'm going to I'm

55:39very excited about.

55:40>> I can do it tomorrow and send

55:41information videos to everyone as well.

55:45>> Do that.

55:45>> Yeah, we'll wait. Okay.

55:47>> So, you're saying that the the people

55:49that own the property, they they

55:52you know, they own up to doing it, but

55:54they didn't realize it was what?

55:56>> Um

55:56>> because it wasn't flagged.

55:58>> Yeah, it wasn't flagged. I believe it's

56:00on their property. Um

56:04and they just been removing some dead

56:05trees. Apparently, there were dead trees

56:07per that 2023 that seemed very alive to

56:10me. And now there's very

56:12>> Yeah.

56:13>> They don't look dead at all.

56:14>> So,

56:15>> I don't really understand. And then

56:16[clears throat] there's a wetland

56:17consultant from Ecotech that does live

56:20on that street.

56:22So I don't remember his name, but

56:27not I would reach out to Natt and uh and

56:30then I'll take videos and pictures and

56:32get back to everyone.

56:35>> Adjourning time.

56:37>> Can I get a motion to adjourn the

56:38meeting?

56:38>> We adjourn the meetings.

56:40>> Second.

56:41>> I second.

56:42>> All those in favor? Hi.

56:44>> Hi.

56:44>> Hi.

56:46>> Thank you. [music]