3.2.2026 Conservation Commission

Welcome to the conservate fable conservation commission meeting being held at uh one government center. Uh we're in the uh first floor hearing room. It's uh Monday, March 2nd uh 2026.

It's 5:31.

Uh pursuant to the open meeting ros any person will make an audio or video recording of this public meeting or may transmit the meeting through any medium.

Attendees are therefore advised that such recordings of transmissions are being made whether perceived or unpersceived by those present and deemed acknowledged and permissible.

Uh we'll start with roll call to my right. Chris Bole Ferrer, John Brandt, Jim Cusk, Drew Carline, and we also have uh Dan Aguar uh conservation agent.

You can call me whatever you want.

Patty Aguar, recording secretary. and we have Craig from uh W Harbor TV.

Okay. Uh first up is a review and discussion of updates on Belrock Road.

Um so nothing new to add. I mean with this weather, we're still just waiting for that uh final silt removal. You'll see that in the um the summary of violations and enforcement actions. I' I've listed outstanding ones and where we've gone and what we've accomplished on some of the others. So it's listed in there as well. So nothing at this point and I would recommend that we table it.

Okay. I have a motion to table. So move second.

All in favor?

I I Okay. Motion passes. Next uh review and discussion or adopting fees.

Might want to just bump it off till later on in the meeting. Okay.

And we'll go through what I put in your packages and how we can move forward.

Motion to move to later in last item in the meeting.

Second.

All in favor? I I motion passes.

Uh review and discussion of outstanding enforcement orders.

Um as I just stated in your package, you'll see a two-page summary of all the enforcement orders and violations that we've been dealing with. Um we can my guess is I I would just put that off till the end of the meeting and you can give me direction on the three or four that need some guidance.

Okay.

Okay. Motion to move review and discussion of outstanding enforcement orders to the last item of the meeting.

Second.

All in favor?

I.

I.

Motion passes.

Next up is a notice of intent SE-24-843.

Applicant is Marco Fritz. Uh project location is 565 Detroit Street.

Assessor's map is E-27-0042.

Filed on behalf of Farland uh Corp. on behalf of the applicant. The applicant is proposing to install an ingground pool and concrete pad p uh pa patio with associated grading. This is tabled from January 6, 2026.

So, we did receive an email this morning asking that the matter be tabled again.

Um I think somebody at the last meeting asked me have they done any work out there. I did go check. They haven't done anything yet beyond what was previously done. Um so um again at at some point in time we should just act on these but if the the applicant did take it upon himself to uh to reach out and ask us to table the matter.

Okay.

Okay. However you see fit.

Motion and table.

Second.

Second.

All in favor.

I pass. Next is a note in SE- 24-847 applicant John Henry owner Harkkins Whitfield LLC project location 121 Witzfield Street assesses map C-1750024 filed by Sean Ainsworth instance engineering on behalf of the applicant the applicant is proposing construction of a single family dwelling this was tabled from January 6 so although we did not get an email request to table um over the last month

we have had some correspondence between if you remember we were trying to get this engineer and this applicant to work with the abuing land owner who was who was here. We finally got those parties together. So the neighbor down the street has abandoned utilizing the consultant that they were using and they were putting contact and they they did have a conversation with Shawn to try to

put these things in a singular type of application. So hoping that at some point in time um this is not a violation. So this isn't something that we really have to get addressed quickly.

So as long as they take is as long as they take.

All right. Have a motion table.

Motion table.

Second.

All in favor?

I I pass.

Next is a uh notice of intent SE-24-855.

Applicant is Weaver Cove Industrial Park LLC. Project location, New Street, assesses map T-2, lot 001, followed by Chrisellia Goggart Consulting LLC. On behalf of the applicant, the applicant is proposing the afterfact restoration area cleared of vegetation.

So, our consultant uh is still working with guarded consulting regarding the wetland delineation. Um I I can offer that our consultant is extremely working extremely hard on our behalf to make sure that this is done correctly. Um this time of the year um not a lot gets done, but I do see email correspondence back and forth with discussions asking for additional information.

Um I have no information regarding getting National Grid to sign on as the land owner of the application. So with that, I would recommend that the matter be tabled.

Okay. Motion table.

So moved. Second.

Okay. All in favor?

I I motion passes.

Next is a notice of intent SE-24-857.

Uh applicant is Benjamin Liberty Benjamin Phillips Liberty Utilities. Uh owner Spectrum project location 994 Jefferson Street. Assessor's map is B-20 lot 002 followed by Ryan Erling of Trion Engineering Company. On behalf of the applicant, the applicant is proposing to install 222 1/2 ft of 4 in carrier pipe with 2-in gas main through means of horizontal drilling. Project also includes entry of exit pit. This was

tabled from January 6th meeting.

So, I did finally get a correspondence back from Ryan Ellering, I guess, is how it's pronounced. Um, asking for some clarification on some of the questions and they are working on acquiring the easement that we had referenced that that they would need to get. So it is moving forward. So with that would I would recommend that the matter be tabled. Okay. Motion tabled.

Motion table.

Second.

All in favor?

I motion passes.

Uh next notice of intent SC-24-861.

Applicant is Ernie Waskski Cahillo of NEC DBA National Grid. Owner location is Weaver Cove Industrial LLC. Project location existing overhead transmission line. Uh sensors map is multiple locations filed by Erica Marcel a power engineering consultant on behalf of the applicant. Project is located within a section of existing rightaway from sky road substation to Somerset Fall River

municipal boundary over Taton River. Uh this project consists of separation of existing N12 and M13 transmission lines.

Uh we prepared multiple structures within the existing rightway. this table from January 6th meeting.

So, you may recall that this this project runs handinhand with the Weaver's Cove uh new street filing. Um those two parties have not resolved uh their differences as of yet. We did receive an email last Thursday or Friday. Um from uh from the representative asking that the matter be tabled.

Okay. Motion table.

Motion table.

Second.

Okay. All in favor?

Motion passes. Uh discussion of violation of 394. Do you want to move that to the end?

Um yep, we can. That one's lumped into the uh the violation.

Motion to move item nine to the end of the meeting.

Second.

All in favor?

I I motion passes. Next, request for certificate of compliance SC-24-161.

Uh owner 3G Reality Limited Partnership.

Project location 372 Stevenson Street.

Cessence map is E-260001 filed by Sean Ainsworth as instant engineering on behalf of the applicant.

The applicant request a certificate of compliance.

So this is if you remember um came about from a violation. The violation part of it had been resolved and we'll we can discuss that later. Uh they had submitted for a request for COC on on the old order of conditions which they were not able to provide us with the recommended uh required information. So with that, the matter was tabled. Um I think we can just take this off the

agenda um rather than keep reading it and then as soon as they do give us the information that's required for moving forward, then we can place it back on independent agenda for discussion. But until then, they won't get COC that they that they requested.

But until they submit it, there's no sense in in labeling it and discussing it. All right. Motion to uh remove item 10 from the agenda.

Second.

All in favor?

I I motion passes.

Um, next up is notice of intent SE-24-871.

Applicant Jason Hutchkins of Hutchkins Hutchkins Holdings. Uh, owner BBC Realy Holding LLC. Project location 500 Innovation Way. Sessions map is W-9 lot 0187 filed by Ricardo Richard uh field engineering company inc. On behalf of the applicant, the applicant proposed to construct a approximate 40,000 square foot warehouse building with loading docks associated parking storm water management structure to

support their existing operations within the forward business park closed workers within the uh buffer zone of bordering vegetative wetland.

All right. So, Rich, if you can give Patty green cards and legal ad um this site may look familiar to you.

Um within the last year we had issued an order of conditions for Bristol Tape. I don't know if you recall. Um Wetlands Lion had previously been approved. That site was approved issued an order of conditions. Um new property owner um who's developed a number of properties very responsibly in the industrial park.

Purchased the the property. Um Rich and I had a discussion because the um scope of work went a little bit beyond the previously limit of work and as being a new owner uh we felt that a new notice of intent a new order of conditions uh would be better than amending the old order of conditions. So this project came in it's been through site plan review with just minor questions and

minor modifications. Uh with that uh 25 foot no activities zone is maintained um as you all like to see. With that, it would be my recommendation that we issue an order of conditions um conditional upon successful completion of site plan review. But I think Rich would like to give a little presentation and you can ask any questions that you may have.

Correct. Um Rich Richio from field engineering on behalf of um the Hutchkins Holding Five. These are the the guys that own um the Ice Cube facility and Ross Seafoods in the industrial park. And this is a lot the lot 500 innovation way which is across the street from their newest facility that they just wrapped up over the last year or so. Um proposing to construct a 39,200 just under 40,000 square footprint

warehouse uh cold storage not a freezer just cold storage uh cold storage facility uh to support their operations will be dry storage in there right now is what the plan is. Um the previous facility was about 31,000 square ft that was previously approved had about 64 parking spaces and um we are proposing a larger building um a little more paved area. Um but we actually only have 24 parking spaces here. Um what we're

proposing to do is to put more of the storm water subsurface um to get provide adequate space for loading uh loading docks and um truck access in around and around the building and um so that's how we were able to change it. I'll go to the plan quickly.

The original plan had a had a surface basin here and a and a large one here.

Um, what we're proposing is to put all the roof into this large subsurface basin here, a portion of the parking into this subsurface basin with with water quality treatment in advance, and then these structures will over top to one of two um constructed wetlands um prior to discharge to the wetland in the uh business park. in this portion of the park, they're respons required to meet

90% TSS removal from the paved surfaces as opposed to what the state requires at 80. So, the combination of the water quality inlets and the the constructed pocket wetlands will provide that. Um, as the agent mentioned, we are respecting the 25 ft no touch. We have proposed a block retaining wall along the westerly side of the property and we're just right up against the 25 uh foot with on the on the easterly side.

We could get that in with a one to one slope and still not have to encroach into that area.

Um the utilities are coming in from the street, sewer and water and um and gas as well. And uh like I said, we have 24 paved parking spaces, also providing space for a dumpster pad and covered bike storage, which is another requirement in the park. So that's basically what we're proposing. If there's any questions, I can take them.

Board have any questions?

The only thing I would mention and I would ask that it be made a condition of approval is that this site is not to be used for temporary parking area for the use across the street. Uh I don't want to see this construction begin a gravel construction yard and then utilized for storing tractor trailer trucks for across the street. Um if if that is the intention then a different design um and

a different intent should be submitted to you. So at at no point should any vehicle uh of this be site be used for vehicle storage for across the street unless the site has been built in accordance with the plan. Then they can use the pave portions of the site for whatever they choose. Other than that I have I have no other issues. And what Rich was stating about the 90% TSS removal. The Southerntherly property

line here is the demarcation of Ribbon Back Road and Innovation Way. Innovation Way, the BEA certificate required the 90% removal. Um, so literally a foot south, you don't need to meet that storm water management standard, but they've clearly met that with the design that's been proposed.

Okay, question. So, going to have a motion to issue an order of condition subject to site plan approval and uh also condition of no uh storage of vehicles on site.

So, moved.

Should that be storage of vehicles for the adjacent property or no storage of vehicles at all? No storage at all until until the site's been constructed in completion. Something to that effect.

Do a second.

Second.

Roll call.

I I thank you.

Thank you.

Danny, you have a memo for the site plan review stuff yet or I will have I was waiting for tonight.

Okay, great.

The approval letter will go out tomorrow.

All right. Awesome. Thank you so much.

Thanks. Have a good day.

It's easier not writing one conditions this, this one conditions that. Let's get one resolved and then we'll get the rest of them done.

I'm going to call I'm going to try to call Alex Gordetski.

He's right here.

Oh, I was just trying to call you.

I I know, but I What? Don't even say there's snow outside cuz there's not.

I didn't know.

I know. We put We did put you off to the end, but now we're almost done. So, let's go.

No time to breathe.

You can start uh John with Don't worry about why I stumble through saying your name. You'll be set up by the time let's go. That's it.

For the other.

All right.

Next up is a request for certificate of compliance SC-24-756.

Applicant is Casey uh Moscowski, trustee of Casey Muscowski, revocable trust.

Project location for Frederick Street.

Census map is C-15- 0007 by Alexander Korgowski a Kowski engineer on behalf of the applicant. The applicant is requesting certificate of compliance.

So we had received um a request of certificate of compliance and as plan as well as site plan review um sign off. We had sent Alex last week some comments for some outstanding items. So there's been an area where uh some work was done and some filling was done beyond the approved limit of work. So we had asked for a couple of things be added to the asbuilt plan. So until we receive that

information in response to those comments, I would recommend that we hold back on issuing the certificate of compliance. And I agree because he has to repave the road. He has to Yeah, there's a lot of work to be done.

I mean not all of it's required for sign off a certificate of compliance but we'll address what we can and but what it is the way he explained it to me there was some feeling in wetlands but he said the lot has all kind of uh trash and garbage there so he had to he had to remove it from the wetlands he said tires ABC as brick concrete he had to remove some tires he said and

to make it look better he filled the wetlands I know the original engineer on this so I'm familiar with what was on site before.

Shane, too bad for you, Al.

How you doing?

Well, we'll get there. We'll get there.

So, with that, I would recommend that we table this and give them the opportunity to respond.

Okay. Can I have a motion?

So, move.

Second.

All in favor?

I I the second is uh Rob's way. Rob.

All right. Let me just read that in and give me a second. Uh, next is a notice of intent SE-24-872 filed by Michael Bisco. Uh, New Century Land Development, uh, owner, Greater Forward River Development. Project location 95 and 151 Robessor's map is Z-3, lots 0018 and 00012 filed by Alexander Barski, engineer. on behalf of the applicant. The applicant is proposing clearing and grubbing locus

lots of uh 25 no activity area. So, uh we did get a final number by about 2:00 today. Alice was we didn't have one till this morning. That's why my report first says that we didn't did come in at the last minute. So, Alice worked hardounding the EP to get that which is good. Um that there was a previous uh ORAD done for this site uh by Jim Walsh maybe two or three months ago. Um, this

is just south of a site that we already permitted uh for Mike Bisco at the very end of Rob. Uh, it's a vacant piece of land wooded owned by the redevelopment authority. There had actually been some permitting done through zoning for a battery storage area which I think kind of fell through because of the amount of infrastructure that needed to connect the battery storage facility with the

set of utility lines about I don't know maybe I don't even think it was a mile away but it was it was quite a way through the industrial park. So, we're actually kind of glad that that didn't go forward. So, I am hoping, and I don't know if this to be the case, I'm hoping that that the developer can utilize this piece with the piece northern to it uh for a larger, more substantial

development. With that, this notice of intent is only for the clearing, removal of stumps, and seating of the site to get it basically cleared and and set for development. Um, we had discussed possibly um doing this through a request for determination. It was it was my feeling that we needed something with a little bit more teeth like an order of conditions in case this developer decided to walk away. So that there

needed to be something recorded at the registry with some set limits and requirements for what was to take on um on the site. So Alex went through the effort of filing a notice of intent uh preparing the drainage calculations uh which we had a discussion. it it's very easy to comply with drainage when you're taking a wooded area that's fair and replacing it with grass that's good

and not a maintained lawn. So the peaks are actually there's a reduction in runoff because of the grass more water than trees. So storm water wise we're in good shape but we want to make sure that this isn't just clearcut and left right so um that's the purpose of going through this endeavor. So with that I recommend an approval but Alex can give you a little bit more.

This is this is basically a plan. This is the area wet line approved flagged approved. This is the 25 no work zone and we're proposing clear cutting it after the no work zone with installation of erosion control along along this line. And that's pretty much this is typical detail. This is pretty much So no change in topography has to happen other than just whatever comes out from the grubbing. Alex, I did have one

question and maybe I missed it cuz my eyes are poor. Is that labeled or dimension 25 ft anywhere? I know we're saying it's the 25 foot, but I couldn't find an offset or a label. So if you can just get us a revised plan with a 25 ft dimension.

Okay, I'll that's it.

Okay, I will.

It scales 25.

Not on the one above it, the one below it.

I'm pretty sure it was intended to be 25, but we can just get that later.

I looked and I looked.

All right. Well, okay. It's No, that's all.

But it is I I'll do the plan and you can bill your client for a revision.

So, this order conditions just for clearing clearing seating. That's it. Okay.

Seating for the purpose of stabiliz stabilization. Okay.

Okay. We're going to have a motion order conditions where for just clearing and grubbing and seating.

Make motion.

So move um make a motion seconded. But as long as we get the updated plans for more foot I'm assuming we're probably going to get a notice of intent for this probably before the work even begins. So okay, due to what's happening otherwise. So hopefully they can move it along quickly. But I I think they're in the process of acquiring it. So acquiring I don't think they it it might take uh

some time for them to go through the Well, this would this isn't going to hold you back.

No.

Okay. I will do I will do it tomorrow.

All right. Motion second. Uh roll call.

I I All righty. Thank you much.

Thank you. You're welcome.

You have a good night.

Bye.

And uh we uh which one do you want to start with?

Fees or enforcement orders?

Uh we'll start with uh how about enforcement orders?

Okay. So in your package you'll see a summary. Uh we basically have three items in red that need some action or direction from from the board. I believe that they're all at the point where we reach out to D. I do want to offer that getting responses from D when it comes to asking them to step in um will not be easy. Um D basically been decimated.

There's not a lot of staff there, but it it is the next step, you know, in our recordeping to follow through with with that type of request. Um we've been we've been extremely lenient on Bart and Bronson. This is really going on. 394 Kilburn. They did come in if you remember and I put the timeline in here.

394 Kilburn isn't that old. Not even a year old yet. Barton Bronson where we're moving into a year and a half.

Uh Blossom Road. Um that one's been going on for a while. I do know that they had reached out to hire a consultant. Then no followup with that. So, um I think we do need to follow up with something other than us again asking for them to I think we take the next step.

That's my opinion.

Okay. So, if you want to lump all three of them with asking for departmental action, um I will send those letters out.

So, if you want to make a motion on that, we can do that.

Yeah. Motion to request for departmental action on 394 Kilurn. Key action on 394 Kilburn Bon Bronson and 2089 Blossom Road. Taken in one vote.

Second.

Second. Okay. Roll call vote.

I I I.

All righty.

All right. So now with that, um, as you go through, just to give you an update on some others, you see North Main Street is Cove that we discussed later on. Um, Redwood Lane again, we had a question about that. So they did come through the process. We did issue an order of conditions. They do have three years to to do that work.

I didn't see the So, they have a a restoration plan on file.

Yes.

Okay. Just making sure.

Yep. Maybe I'll send you a copy. Maybe you weren't here when we got to that point.

I didn't. It was probably I missed the July the August meeting. So, no, it was actually done in January or 25. So, if you look at the dates, but I'll I'll go ahead and take a look at it or I'll send it over to you. um in a lot of these. So, just following up, the permit extension act is also going to give, you know, the majority of these that have permits another two-year extension.

Um but they should still, similar to 1262 Brighten Avenue, we issued an order of conditions. Part of that order required them to complete site plan review. um they have not completed site plan review because of the cost of running water and sewer but at the end of the day they haven't moved forward with any type of development and they can't until they complete that site plan review so status quo on that I keep an

issued an order of conditions after the fact. 372 Steven Street, we followed up with they filed an ANRAD and all the work is outside of that area, so they were okay. And then Bell Rock Road. So, I think we've done pretty well within the the three laggers. Yeah. Okay, sounds good. Thank you.

So, next uh fees. So what I did was I, you know, I g put together a little package of adjacent communities um that have, let's say, they have their stuff together for the most part, but um they're communities that um criminal rating is not always easy. Um they have substantial fees that they that they require. Um so rather than, you know, go through each one of them specifically tonight,

take a look at it. I think it's pretty obvious what's reasonable, what's not reasonable, what's extortion, what's not extortion. Um, but we are definitely umacking lacking um because there aren't many commissions. Most most applicants will call or email asking what what our fee schedule is. And when we tell them that we have nothing beyond um the Wellness Protection Act fees, they they find it

funny. Not not really funny, but just odd that that we don't. Now I will also offer and I know we had kind of been putting off this waiting for wetlands protection act revision fees that is back again before for discussion to get to get cleaned up. So I have a um a webinar I want to say next week. It was supposed to be actually be Friday but because of the storm they ended up it's

a zoom thing but they still put it off um to go over and and give some comments. So they they are moving forward with with new rags.

Um I don't know what's what's going to be in that webinar. It may be fees. Um which at that point that would be great that I could report back to you at next month's meeting and say hey D is contemplating this or maybe there's not.

But that doesn't mean that we can't start and at least come up with a list of and they ask if you look at randoms they have two sets of fees. They actually have an initial processing fee when you file a notice of intent which is substantial and then they actually have a review fee. So when you look at RAM, there's two pages there. Make sure you look at both because it's two

different fees at two different times that that they require. And they there are there are municipalities that even if they come in and ask for a copy of an older order of conditions, which so if somebody hasn't recorded their order of conditions, they can come and get a copy from us, but we first have to go get the copy of that, bring it to the clerk's office, the clerk certifies it as being

the same as what was previously approved. Then they can come and pick that up. There are municipalities that charge for that $75 or $100 just just for completing that process, right?

Patty and I do it. We do all of these things without any additional fees. Um and then we, you know, once we do have a discussion about what can we increase the fees, um I need to find out and find out a little bit better where our fees go and the accessibility. I know we have a decent amount of money in in our own account for different types of education

opportunities or so I I want to get a better handle of okay when this money comes in where does it go and for what purposes and what right what can it be used for and exactly right so I mean open space if it can be used for open space and land acquisition I know we just went through the CPC um you know and they were very generous with land acquisition dollars for the water department um if

we can find that we're able to use those funds because it is very limited by what we can use those funds for. If that is something that we can do that then that that frees up monies that the CPC doesn't have to provide for that and it can go more towards a different type of development. So I'll do some more digging on that but in the meantime read through the um I don't think you need to

go digging and looking at others. I think that's a pretty good sample size of of what's out there. Um, Westport is probably the kindest out of the group that I gave you, but even that is far far increase of of what we do. So, take a look at it, give me your thoughts, send me some emails what your thoughts are. Let's say for the next meeting, if we come up with, you know, everybody

what you think is reasonable, um, we can start drafting that cuz once we come up with what we want to present, it's got to go to city council.

Yeah. Well, so two different ways to go about it, right? So I I think I think in order to implement any fees, we may have to create a bylaw first.

Yeah.

So this isn't like this isn't like planning or zoning board of appeals where there are already fees established that the board can just vote to change, right? So this is a new fee. So I've got to find the mechanism that we can institute new fees. I don't think it's as simple as just we decide these are the fees, right?

I think there has to be I think the fees have to fall within the framework of a bylaw.

And I think and even if the bylaw is very simplistic just to address fees, then that's where we stop with it. We've talked about that in the past.

And I think before it goes to city council, I think we need to, you know, demonstrate what the fees we're asking for, but then demonstrate what other towns and other municipalities charge and put it in appropriate context so that we're not just making up these fees. It's like we've been deficient in charging people and it shows in our agenda, right? and it shows in revenues that could come into this

commission to be used, you know, potentially for, you know, open space purchasing.

Um, but I think we need to when we do that, we need to put it in the appropriate context because just so like we're making up fees and we're really we've done uh every so over the last two years, we were able to go in and we were able to get all of our planning board fees updated which hadn't been touched I think like since the mid 2000 2005 2006.

So, we did all our planning, all our zoning fees, and all of our engineering fees. We basically knocked off one a year since I've been here to to get those fees increased. So, that was substantial. We almost doubled the amount of money that we that we generate for revenue.

Now, contractor's fees didn't stay flat in the last 20 years what they charge for a water connection. So, how can ours right?

And I think that's generally what happens in the city is that we've just let kept all of these things flat. this is an opportunity for increased revenue and you know potentially increased staff or different different types of things or the land acquisition aspect of it.

The other thing is is is you know encouraging to them them to do their due diligence. We've had matters that have come before us things are incomplete it's kind of thrown against the wall and hope something will stick and you know if they have to file another fee in order to just table just to table something there is a fee.

Right. Right. So everyone, we need them to do their due diligence prior to coming here and we need them to follow specific timelines prior to you getting here. And you know, when we get an SE number at 3:30, the day before a meeting or we get plans on a Friday before a Monday meeting without the appropriate time to either visit the site or or review the plans or Dan reviewing the plans,

it's not it's not respectful of the commission's time. Um and it's not a good way to do business.

Yeah.

So, so in your packages again this is mostly fees that I I've given regulations although some of domet is in there about deadlines when you need to submit it by blah blah blah blah blah. So that's that that'll come next.

But I think if we start with the fee part and then say okay now now we've got to create some framework what what do we start with that framework with when are things due when when will we allow something in like so for instance as Chris stated so tonight that said we just got the file number I had already reviewed it because we don't know when they're going to come in either right so

if they if they meet the deadline for submission which I think is already too close I don't think we're giving enough we should be having like because we're now is it a week so we should really give two weeks required and that's what happens is normally if you have a twoe time period which most places do then then D responds normally within two weeks with a file number we only require

that they file a week before the meeting so that only gives D 4 days to respond right and and that's why we're usually getting file numbers the day after a meeting so I think if we extend that time that's only going to help us well then it makes them it requires them to come back again yeah before the commission right? You know, yeah, doesn't seem higher fees in these other communities doesn't seem to be an issue

as far as development. So, I mean, why should we have lower fees?

Yeah.

These other communities don't have a problem.

Yeah.

We're leaving a lot on the table.

Exactly.

Keep coming back and back with no We're not We are not to be a revenue generator. make sure make sure we all understand. However, that these fees and the work that we put in could have substantial ramifications for open space development, training, things like that. So, um improve the commission.

This isn't like an enterprise fund where we need to bring the money in to to pay people or substantiate, you know, our efforts.

Uh but that doesn't mean that that that we shouldn't impose them as well. So, correct.

So, take a look at what we've got. Um, I think it'll be a good start and everybody come in. We'll take an average and we'll we'll go with those numbers, right?

Yep.

All righty.

I have nothing else to add.

Okay.

Thanks, Dan.

All right. So, next is uh approval for a minutes from January 6 table. We just table the discussion on fees. Okay. So, motion to table fees.

Motion to table.

Second.

All in favor? I I I next approval of minutes from January 6 2026.

Motion table.

Seconded.

Okay. Roll call.

I I Okay. Pass. Can I have a motion to adjurnn?

Second.

I I All righty.