2026-10-07 - Conservation Commission

00:002026.

00:01We just did the pledge of allegiance and

00:04now we're going to begin. Um first we

00:06need to um do roll call.

00:11So start with myself. Brian Averbeck. I

00:13am here. Uh Nick Rudolph uh chair is not

00:16available today. Um Tom

00:20>> present.

00:21>> Wilson

00:23>> present.

00:24>> Joe Laval

00:26>> here. Uh and Anthony Parzi and Bernardo

00:29are both uh not here today. Okay. Um

00:34does anybody have anything on the uh

00:35previous

00:37um meeting minutes? Any changes that you

00:39would like to uh present?

00:42No. Okay. Can we get a motion to approve

00:44the previous meeting minutes?

00:46>> I'll make a motion to approve the

00:48minutes.

00:49>> Second.

00:49>> Second.

00:51>> Approve. I I

00:52>> I Okay.

00:55>> All right. Um,

00:57so we're going to start with um 620

01:01River Beach Boulevard. So for everyone

01:03presenting for that, please come

01:04forward. Please state your name and uh

01:07your address.

01:08>> Mr. Chairman, members of the commission,

01:10Joseph Koggio, One Spring Street Recting

01:13the applicant, 620 Revier Beach

01:15Boulevardy Trust. uh seeking a uh an

01:18approval uh order of conditions for a uh

01:21uh

01:24allowance of a shed that uh has been uh

01:26placed on the property. Um we uh have uh

01:30completed the site visit. At the site

01:32visit, there were a couple of items that

01:33were uh requested. One uh mainly was to

01:36uh complete the application with the

01:38zoning board of appeals uh that dealt

01:41with the location of the shed. We have

01:43done that and in obtaining their

01:46approval, the variances that were needed

01:47for their approval, uh we had agreed to

01:50reduce the size of the shed uh by

01:53removing it off of the uh the easement

01:56that the we had abuted the easement, the

01:59city easement um that ran across the

02:02back of the property. Uh so the uh

02:05approval was based on a a condition that

02:07we uh

02:09recede a part of the uh the shed that

02:11takes it off of the um uh off of the uh

02:15the easement. Um we've uh have that uh

02:19uh variance uh ready for recording along

02:21with uh hopefully the approval of the uh

02:24petition here tonight. Um, we've als we

02:27were also asked to deal with uh obtain a

02:30storm water uh management expert that

02:32would deal with the uh runoff on the

02:35property because of the placement of

02:37turf that was put um in the backyard.

02:40Uh, and we have uh our expert here. Um,

02:44we I believe we submitted the the uh

02:46plan in advance um so that the board can

02:48uh uh the commission can take a look at

02:50it. Um, but I can turn it over now to uh

02:54Mike um so we can uh uh deal with the

02:57mitigation that was the other issue that

02:59the commission presented. So Mike, just

03:02to make it easier for your presentation,

03:05our big issue was that there was too

03:06much impermeable surface. Um the turf

03:09obviously led for us looking at it from

03:12a neighbor perspective because a lot of

03:14people don't realize as being on the

03:15conservation commission, we think of

03:16ourselves as we're the neighbor of your

03:19applicant. how would we feel? Would we

03:21have want this approved? And the turf

03:23that you had in the backyard was clearly

03:26something that if I was a neighbor, I

03:28wouldn't have been thrilled about. So,

03:29um, if you can really go into detail of

03:31how you've alleviated that problem, I'd

03:34definitely appreciate that.

03:35>> Totally understandable.

03:36>> So, just quickly as well before we

03:38start, I don't think we did get these

03:39plans yet.

03:41>> Oh.

03:41>> Electronically,

03:42>> I can I'll send you a copy right after

03:44this.

03:45I'm just gonna say it's going to be

03:46difficult for us to hear this, see the

03:48plans from this distance, and also

03:50approve anything tonight.

03:52>> I do. Um, it's in my car though. I I

03:54have an email. I can send you an email.

03:57>> I I mean, I think I think it's a moot

03:59point. I'm just saying without further

04:00time to actually look at them and dive

04:02into them, it's probably

04:04>> totally understandable.

04:08>> Yes.

04:09>> Yep.

04:12Sure.

04:41>> Nope. Totally understandable.

04:42>> Show show me what you got.

04:43>> Yeah. So, for the record, my name is

04:45Michael Schmidt. I'm a wetland scientist

04:46with Goddard Consulting. Um, I'm here

04:50regarding the notice of intent filed for

04:52620 Rever Beach Boulevard. Um, obviously

04:55it was in regards to some issues that

04:57the town and the commission had with the

04:59unpermitted installation of about 4,100

05:02square feet of turf and the installation

05:05of two sheds and associated walkways. Um

05:09the applicant has come forward with some

05:11remedies to that. Um we are proposing

05:14the complete removal of the artificial

05:16turf. Um that'll be um replaced with sod

05:20back to the original conditions. It was

05:21lawn before, so it'll go back to being

05:24permeable lawn again. Um and then to

05:27bring they've already been before the uh

05:30zoning board um to bring the sheds into

05:33compliance with their side of things.

05:35They're going to be shifting the

05:36location of some of the sheds outside of

05:38a sewer easement that runs through that

05:40backyard. So, one of the sheds will be

05:42reduced in size to get it out of that

05:44footprint and one of the sheds will be

05:46pulled closer to the home to get outside

05:48of that footprint. Um, and then

05:55>> I have the original. So, I need to

05:58>> Yeah, I need to record that. That's

06:00their approval.

06:03Sure.

06:07Um and then to mitigate for the increase

06:10in impervious that will remain as a

06:12result of the two constructed sheds, um

06:15we've proposed storm water management in

06:17the form of a subsurface coldtech. Um uh

06:21storm water infiltration chamber that

06:22will be installed beneath the um the

06:25rear lawn and of both sheds will tie

06:29into that to capture the entirety of the

06:31runoff.

06:32>> [snorts]

06:33>> So

06:42many issues were microphone. Sorry.

06:45There was so many issues with the um

06:47with with everything with those sheds.

06:49So now that they've approved that,

06:50that's a huge deal for us that being

06:52able to see that and obviously removing

06:54all of the impermeable surface of the

06:57backyard is is definitely a really what

07:00we wanted to see. Um, was there anything

07:02else in regards to the project that you

07:05think would be important for us to know?

07:06>> Yes. Um, on those sheds, because the

07:09whole site is within the flood zone, um,

07:12we'll also be fitting those sheds with

07:14flood vents so that water can pass

07:16through um, during flood events. So,

07:19that'll kind of help bolster that in

07:22that in that regard. [snorts]

07:24>> Yeah. I'm sorry. I'm just looking

07:26through the they have this up on the

07:27screen so I'm just kind of taking a look

07:29at it as you

07:31>> Does anybody else on the commission have

07:33questions they want to ask

07:40>> Joe? Nothing

07:44>> Tom

07:45there uh the storm water calcs

07:50to size the cult is that anywhere on

07:52these plans? It's not on the plans, but

07:53we can provide you. There's a storm

07:55water report that the engineer generated

07:56as well that we can provide.

08:13Just we're just looking through what

08:15she's has on the computer.

08:27Yeah. Can you go to the next?

08:31>> Oh, we're not going to do that.

08:33[laughter]

08:35>> Yeah. Is there a page we really should

08:37see?

08:38>> It's mostly at the beginning. It's It's

08:40just that it's been designed to

08:42>> Okay. Yeah. Yeah.

08:45>> Yep.

08:47>> Yep. two, a 10, 25, and 100year.

08:50>> That looks good.

08:54>> Tom, what do you think?

08:57>> I think this is all way too much to

08:59digest and look at

09:02>> to approve an

09:02>> I think the big Well, I think the big

09:04thing is they're removing the turf. If

09:05they have the approval for the sheds,

09:07that there the city's already done that,

09:09then that was the the bigger issue the

09:10city's already approved and they're

09:12moving it out of any issue. And then if

09:14they were going to keep any part of the

09:16imperial service of the turf, then I was

09:18going to obviously have an issue with

09:19that. But they said they're removing all

09:21of it. So as long as they're removing

09:22all of it, I don't see any reason not to

09:24approve the NOI considering that they

09:26have the approval from the city already

09:29for that.

09:30>> Well, so this is a 76 page report. I

09:33haven't seen the sizing of the cult,

09:34where the cult is, what the details of

09:36the cult are, how the interch

09:40look at plans when they're sent to me,

09:41and these weren't sent to me. So that's

09:42why I don't

09:44I'm not trying to be an That's

09:45pardon the French, but n

09:47>> totally understand.

09:47>> 76 page report. I can't make a decision

09:49on a 76 page report and a 15page set of

09:52plans just from the information you're

09:54feeding me now. Yep. I haven't even

09:55gotten the chance to read the zoning

09:57board of appeals yet. So, this is my

10:00>> Sure.

10:02I mean, do you think it would make sense

10:03to continue this until the next meeting

10:07for the fact that we really didn't have

10:09the time to review this?

10:16>> Yes.

10:20>> Got it.

10:26>> So, yet again, this is the first time

10:28we're seeing this report.

10:31which is part of the problem. Um, but

10:34yet again, I I feel it's I mean, we can

10:38put it up to a vote if we want to, if

10:41you feel comfortable. I mean, I think

10:42most of the issues they've resolved um

10:46to my satisfaction.

10:47>> Well, so what's the work's the work's

10:50done. So, what's the what's the purpose

10:53of rushing an NOI that we're not going

10:55to review if it's not like they're going

10:57to delay the project or have no have

10:59limited beneficial use of their yard.

11:01It's it's done. It's after the fact.

11:04>> So, I mean, I' I'd rather make sure it's

11:08>> I I don't know.

11:10>> The only No, the only thing we did was

11:12get the approval. We haven't done

11:14anything yet

11:16>> for the the approval here as well. going

11:18to

11:19>> and we wouldn't I I think we'd be all

11:21right with a a continuence if that's

11:23what the board, you know, the commission

11:24is looking for. I would just ask that if

11:26if it's to review what's being submitted

11:30and again if if we didn't submit it

11:32correctly, I apologize.

11:33>> Typically, it just needs to go to con if

11:36we could if we could get it so that we

11:37wouldn't have to bring you know if

11:40>> if it was to everybody's satisfaction

11:42after review. Yeah. and it was just a

11:44formality at the next meeting that we

11:46wouldn't need to to bring our expert

11:48back

11:48>> then that would I would just ask for

11:50that consideration.

11:52>> I could I could if there's any issues

11:54with the plan review or anything I could

11:56email

11:56>> you could email

11:57>> yeah because you you have been more than

11:59patient with us with continuing our you

12:01know granting our continuence requests.

12:03So we obviously would

12:05>> be fine with

12:06>> I think that makes the most sense.

12:07to the November meeting, but yet again,

12:10even though we love you here, any

12:12questions that we have after seeing that

12:14and being able to review and it would be

12:16emailed and then

12:17>> and if not, I'd be glad to appear next.

12:20>> I think to come for the November meeting

12:22and I think it would be a pretty simple

12:24thing at that point. Um because unless

12:26there's something crazy in that report,

12:28um the fact that you're removing the

12:29turf is really was our main issue and

12:32you have the the shed already fixed and

12:35answered with the city. So, um I think

12:37that's probably the best solution.

12:39>> Okay. Can I I just get that original.

12:42>> Are there are there are there two sheds

12:43in the sur are they are both sheds in

12:45the sur?

12:46>> No, only one was and neither one is now

12:49on the easement at all.

12:52>> The the plot plan I received in May,

12:56maybe June, shows both sheds in the

12:59easement.

13:00>> Yep. Both both are being moved.

13:02>> They're So, they are both being

13:03>> They are both being moved. One's being

13:04actually shortened off of it and the

13:06other one

13:06>> they're both being this says one the

13:08existing shed one shed

13:12>> that's what they

13:14>> Wait I'm sorry. So are you are you

13:15installing a full coltetech chamber and

13:18everything there?

13:19>> Yes.

13:20>> So that would be that would be an

13:22entirely different project.

13:25>> Yes.

13:26>> That that would need an entirely

13:28different NOI everything. I mean that's

13:30like that's like a major project for

13:32>> Okay.

13:34So, you're going to have to come back

13:35regardless.

13:36>> Okay.

13:37>> Um, you'd have to file an NOI.

13:39>> I Yeah, I thought this was a

13:42>> I thought this was just for the shed and

13:44for the uh turf removal. So, if you're

13:47doing that, you you need to file an NOI

13:49with us.

13:49>> That would be Yeah, that was being filed

13:51as a mitigation for the work that was

13:54being proposed under this NOI.

14:00>> Yeah.

14:02because

14:05still increased the impervious area via

14:07the shed roofing.

14:09>> Yeah. So,

14:10>> but but that was that was kind of my

14:12point. This this is two separate

14:13projects. You're

14:15>> mitigating what you can mitigate with

14:17the removal of the turf and the

14:19relocation of the sheds per zoning. But

14:21then to come into compliance with the

14:23Wetlands Protection Act, it's another

14:25NOI saying this is how we're going to be

14:27in compliance with the Wetlands

14:28Protection Act.

14:31This this is rectifying the issues

14:34>> and then the next NOI is review of

14:36>> fixing what's going to be a future

14:38problem. I think you need to file an NOI

14:40for the col

14:43can all be done at the same time. Um

14:45we'll make this easy. It's just show us

14:47the plans you have for that. File for

14:49the NOI and you should be good. So let's

14:52so we'll continue everything to for the

14:54that part of the shed and the turf will

14:56be continued to November. That should be

14:58pretty simple. You need to file an NO

15:00for the coldtech.

15:01>> Okay. Well,

15:03>> let me let me revise that then because I

15:05I'd be fine with allowing them to remove

15:08the turf and and do the shed, but that's

15:10fine to do that now.

15:13>> Okay. Yeah, that that makes sense. Okay.

15:15>> It takes care of the

15:16>> the sooner the sooner the turf is gone,

15:18the better the better off the

15:19>> That that's totally fine. I agree with

15:20that. Okay. So, we can put up to a vote

15:23everything except the coldtech. So what

15:25you actually have here that's that we

15:27can we can vote on right now.

15:29>> Yes.

15:29>> But the other part is not included in

15:31that.

15:32>> Okay.

15:32>> Are we good?

15:34>> Yes.

15:34>> Okay.

15:35>> We got it.

15:36>> Correct.

15:40>> While it was a while ago.

15:43>> Yeah.

15:45>> Yeah. This again, we we were looking at

15:48what could be done about the turf

15:50>> to make it and the decision was to take

15:54it out, but we still have to deal with

15:56the the shed going in. And

15:58>> yeah, because that was a separate issue.

16:01>> Yes.

16:01>> So, these plans come to us, they go to

16:03the D under a new file number.

16:06>> This this file number we're looking at

16:08now is for removal of the tariff.

16:10>> Right.

16:10>> Okay.

16:12>> Okay. So, I'm gonna close the hearing.

16:14Okay. for this part. We're going to have

16:17another conversation after you file the

16:19NOI for that.

16:19>> All right.

16:20>> Okay. So, going to close for that that

16:23side of it. Um, now we have the ability

16:26to discuss. So, is there for anything,

16:29Tom?

16:31Any questions or anything?

16:33>> No, I think it's it's pretty

16:34straightforward. The removal of the

16:35tariff replacement with sod and the

16:37relocation of the sheds as stated in the

16:39zoning.

16:41>> Wilson, Joe, any any follow-ups? Are you

16:42good with that?

16:44Okay. All right. So, at this point, I'm

16:46going to make a motion to approve the

16:48NOI that consists of the shed and the

16:51turf.

16:54>> Yeah.

16:54>> So,

17:26I don't think so because the

17:29>> because it's not on there's nothing

17:31about that

17:31>> because these plans aren't in their DE

17:33file.

17:34>> Yeah,

17:37>> it needs to be separated.

17:40>> I love efficiency, but [laughter]

17:43>> yeah.

17:45Okay. Um, so I'd like to make a motion

17:48to approve the NOI.

17:50>> Motion to approve.

17:52>> Second.

17:53>> All in favor?

17:54>> I

17:54>> I

17:55>> I

17:56>> So all set.

17:57>> We're not continued to next month on

17:59this.

17:59>> You're all set for that.

18:01>> Okay.

18:02>> Um, we're going to give you the

18:03original. Can you get us a copy of that

18:05back?

18:05>> Absolutely. Y

18:09>> Thank you, gentlemen.

18:10>> Thank you for working with us.

18:20Okay. So, um the next uh on the docket

18:24is 28 Shamat Street.

18:28>> They're noted as

18:34>> 28 Sham is listed as continued because

18:36I'm still awaiting the stamped plans

18:39that were presented. So in the

18:41presentation that they gave at last

18:42month's meeting,

18:45the plans that were demonstrated on the

18:47presentation were not stamped and I need

18:50a copy of those plans that were shown on

18:53the presentation stamped and signed.

18:56>> 28 shammed is continued to November. Um

19:00the same will be for the one land

19:01improvement conveyance project number

19:03one that's moved to the November

19:05meeting.

19:16Okay. Um, 23 Blake Street.

19:21So, um, with 23 Blake Street, they sent

19:24in the photos that demonstrated that

19:27they had full compliance. Um we are uh

19:31we don't need to open or close this but

19:34we do need to uh either approve, deny or

19:37continue. Um considering that they were

19:41compliant and they sent in the photos,

19:43my recommendation would be to uh

19:46approve. Um is there any the certificate

19:49of compliance? Is there anyone uh have

19:51any questions on that? No. Okay. Can I

19:54get a motion to approve the certificate

19:55of compliance at 23 Blake Street? Motion

19:58to approve.

20:00>> A second.

20:01>> I.

20:02>> We all in favor?

20:05>> I I

20:06>> Okay. Motion approved.

20:08>> Okay.

20:22All right. Um the next one is 36 Floyd

20:25Street.

20:33Please uh state your name and your

20:34address.

20:35>> Eugene Katzone, developer and the owners

20:37representative for Rohar Enterprises. Uh

20:39Paul Finoi was supposed to be here. He

20:41also has a meeting in Winthrop, a new

20:42business meeting. So he's juggling

20:44around. I'd be happy to answer any

20:45questions that I could possibly answer.

20:49>> Okay. Um so please tell us uh more about

20:52the project.

20:53>> Okay. Uh it was a split lot where a

20:56variance was issued and this is lot B on

20:58that variance. Uh we uh have the notice

21:01of intent. We have the order of

21:03conditions. We have built the structure.

21:05We had a site plan last week. It's a

21:07single family modular home and we had

21:10the site visit last Saturday. And if

21:11there's any questions uh we can answer

21:13tonight. I'll try do my best to do so.

21:16>> Okay. Is there anybody on the commission

21:18has any questions?

21:19>> Uh Mr. Chairman, I I did a site visit.

21:23Uh and I thought it was exemplary job

21:25done. Everything was follow according to

21:28what we were specified in MOS and I'm

21:31full approve of what they did.

21:36>> Tom Wilson.

21:38>> Good. Okay. Then I'd like to make make a

21:41motion to approve the certificate of

21:43compliance with 36 Floyd Street.

21:45>> I'll make that motion.

21:46>> Can I get a second?

21:48>> Second. [clears throat]

21:48>> All in favor say I.

21:50>> I.

21:51>> Congratulations.

21:51>> Thank you very much. Have a nice

21:52evening. Thank you, sir.

21:58>> All right. Next on the docket is uh 101

22:01Lee Burnbank Highway.

22:05>> Thank you. Please uh state your name and

22:07address.

22:09>> Hi. Uh my name is Dan Ketches. I'm a

22:11civil engineer with VHB.

22:20>> All right. Please tell me more about the

22:21project.

22:22>> Uh, yep. So, we're here for uh

22:24certificate compliance for phase one of

22:27Trident Logistics Center. So, it's a new

22:29uh warehouse building, associated

22:31parking, truck court,

22:32>> slash airplane hanger.

22:33>> It's a large building. Uh, storm water

22:35improvements, other utility

22:37improvements. Um, so we submitted photos

22:39as built survey as well as the FEMA uh

22:42flood certificates for the the building

22:44on the pump house. Um, I believe it was

22:46walked um this weekend by some members

22:48of the commission. happy to answer any

22:50questions they might have.

22:51>> Is uh is there anybody that is ready to

22:54lease it?

22:55>> Uh to my knowledge, they're still

22:57actively looking and and in talks. Um

23:01>> is it for just my own curiosity, more

23:03like an Amazon type place is what you're

23:05looking for? Is someone going to fill

23:06that up for logistics kind of center?

23:08>> It's it's intended to be, you know,

23:10general bulk storage, so not a not a

23:12last mile type of um facility.

23:14>> Got it. Well, being near the airport

23:15definitely helps.

23:16>> Warehousing. Yep. It's a it's a great

23:17location. I know they're they're excited

23:19to hopefully get that filled and and

23:21start the next phases.

23:23>> Any uh anyone here have any questions?

23:27>> Okay. Well, um from everything that I've

23:29seen, uh that it looks like it's there's

23:32no reason to have any issues with the

23:33certificate of compliance. So, my uh

23:35recommendation would be to approve. So,

23:38uh do we have anybody that would like to

23:40make a motion to approve the certificate

23:41of compliance?

23:42>> I'll make that motion, Mr. Chairman.

23:44>> Do we have a second?

23:45>> Second. All in favor?

23:48>> I

23:48>> I

23:49>> Congratulations.

23:50>> Thank you all.

23:51>> Hopefully you get a tenant there soon.

23:57>> So, the next on the docket was uh there

23:59was a notice of violation for 15 Arcadia

24:01Street. Um the

24:05homeowner so far uh is working with us,

24:08so we're going to uh continue this for

24:12the time being. Um, and there'll be more

24:15on that on the future.

24:21>> Yeah, one of you.

24:23>> There was an additional violation issued

24:25this week to 65 Ellerton Street. I

24:28believe copied all of you on that

24:30notice. Um, one of the commissioners was

24:33able to go out on the day and ask them

24:35to stop work. um

24:38they've been served with an order of

24:39cease and desist and it was very short

24:42notice. So I mean it was happened on

24:44Saturday so um we've asked them to

24:46either attend today or the next meeting.

24:50>> So more on that

24:52>> November. [laughter]

24:54>> Thank you.

24:54>> And for anyone wondering the November

24:57meeting will be November Wednesday,

24:58November 4th. Um November 11th is a

25:01holiday. So we'll have in on the 4th.

25:04It's typically the first Wednesday of

25:05every month, but um just to confirm why

25:08it's that one. Uh we had four site

25:10visits. One was 101 Lee Burbank Highway

25:13for a certificate of compliance, 36

25:15Floyd Street for a certificate of

25:16compliance, 33 Baitman Aav for a

25:18potential violation, and 15 Arcadia

25:20Street for a violation. Uh there weren't

25:22any communications, so uh I throw it to

25:25everybody here. Is there any additional

25:27business that anyone would like to

25:28discuss?

25:31uh the high school project uh street

25:34sweeping daily or um they should at

25:37minimum put sedimentation sacks in the

25:40catch basins around the rotary.

25:42>> Yeah,

25:42>> they're tracking all kinds of rocks

25:44every every morning I drive through

25:46there. Um it's just dust and rocks and

25:49dirt and debris all through the rotary.

25:52Um they're tracking pads are obviously

25:54getting the bulk of it, but not not all

25:55of it. I don't maybe maybe they are

25:57sweeping daily. They haven't done it yet

25:59today. Uh I'm not out there monitoring

26:01which particles of sediment were there

26:03dayto day. Uh I just know that daily

26:06it's kind of a mess. So would like to

26:09ask them.

26:10>> I think that is a fear thing for us to

26:12send an email out and to ask them to do

26:14that especially as it's not just going

26:16to be that project. It's going to be 33

26:18feet 3,300 feet of shores and everything

26:21else. So yeah, that makes total sense.

26:23So if we can send an email out to them

26:24to ask them to do that, that'd be great.

26:27Um, is there anything else that anybody

26:29else would like to discuss?

26:32If not, then I would make a motion to

26:34adjurnn.

26:37>> Motion to adjurnn.

26:38>> Have a second.

26:40>> Second.

26:41>> Motion approved. Thank you everyone for

26:43coming out and thank you for everyone

26:44for watching. Thank you.