001Welcome everyone to the May 4th, 2026 Ashland Conservation Commission meeting, which I'm calling to order at 7:00 p.m. There is a quorum of the commission, and this meeting is being recorded. This is an off-cycle meeting where we address only 40B applications, and it is being held live at the Select Board Room at Ashland Town Hall. This meeting is also being recorded on WACA cable, and if there is any interruption in the broadcast, the meeting will continue. It's also a hybrid meeting where we have this open to Zoom, and I will address the Zoom part of the meeting with a with a protocol. Under Governor Baker's March 12th, 2020 executive order, public boards are allowed to meet remotely. This order was most recently extended until June of 2027 by Governor Healey as part of the supplemental
002bill budget bill signed in March of 2023. Please follow these procedures for attending and participating. The meetings of the Conservation Commission is being held using Zoom. As I identify the item on the agenda, the applicant for that agenda item will be given an opportunity to provide a presentation and will be allowed to share the screen to show plans, pictures, etc. At the end of the presentation, the chair, myself, Greg Wands, will entertain questions and comments from the commission. When the commission's discussion has concluded, the chair will open up the discussion from the public. Upon the hearing or meeting conclusion, a motion to continue or close the hearing will be entertained. After any discussion, the chair will call for a roll call vote. During the meeting, commission members will keep their video on and microphone muted
003unless speaking. Applicants and representatives, please keep video off and microphone muted until your agenda item is discussed. Public, please keep your microphone muted until recognized. If you are calling in by phone number, you can use the star six feature to mute and unmute. If you need to share your screen, you may request permission through the chair to do so. When the discussion is open to the public, if you wish to ask a question or make a comment, you may request to speak by using the raise hand feature on Zoom. If you are calling in by phone number, you can use the star nine feature to raise and lower your hand. When acknowledged to speak, please state your name and address prior to speaking. Public comment is limited to 3 minutes per speaker. Comments must be
004limited to the Wetlands Protection Act, Ashland Wetlands Protection Bylaw, or Ashland Stormwater Management Bylaw. Questions and comments not related to the commission's jurisdiction will not be accepted. During the meeting, the host, Becca Solomon, our Ashland Conservation Commission agent, will monitor the participants for raised hands and will be recording the names and addresses of commenters. Signing of documents will occur during the week after the conclusion of the meeting. It's now 7:04, and when the the clock strikes 7:05, I will introduce our one and only scheduled hearing. It's now 7:05, and our scheduled hearing, notice of intent 10 to May 10 to 60 Main Street, map 14, parcel 128, SLV Ashland LLC, care of Lucas Environmental LLC, DEP file number 95-1018. So, this it's our understanding that the applicant is requesting a continuance until May 18th at
0057:05 p.m. Yeah. Do we want to explain why? Yeah. I'm going to. All right. I'll now turn the microphone over to the vice chair, Carl Hakansson. Thanks, Greg. At this is the fourth hearing for 10 to 60 Main Street, which most of you probably know is the 40B project for the mills across the street from Town Hall here. Um at the third hearing, um we uh requested some material from the applicants. Uh [snorts] we we did request a soil management plan uh uh in lieu of uh them not filing a RAM report until the end of this process. We needed something to review the contamination uh at the site because that was what we decided to discuss first of all. So, uh technically, we did uh uh ask for a soil management plan. Uh what
006we received was a what we thought was a generic uh soil management plan. We had also at the third hearing asked that they include a characterization of the site, um and to let us know what contaminants were at the site and where those contaminants were, not just how they were going to handle them once they found it. Uh when we got the soil management plan, we realized that it really wasn't uh uh the substance of that plan wasn't what we had asked for, what we had requested. So, uh we wrote back to the applicants and said uh this is really inadequate, and we really don't have a path forward here unless we have more material to review. They responded by asking for a continuance of 2 weeks to make an attempt to provide us with
007that information. Uh so that um that's where we are uh this evening. Uh because this was a scheduled hearing, we had to open the hearing. We will eventually move to continue the hearing for 2 weeks, but uh we haven't had an opportunity as a commission to discuss this uh um back and forth that we that uh for the most part it's been uh Beck Solomon and myself with the applicant. So we thought it would be a good opportunity to bring the rest of the commissioners up to date on where we are. Um and uh to answer any questions that you may have or that the public may have. I'm looking at you. So who's actually going to be performing the test? That's a good question. We don't know that. We There seems to be uh
008I don't want to speak too much about this other than be because the applicant is not present. [clears throat] Uh but there seems to be a little bit of a communication breakdown between what the Conservation Commission is asking and what the applicant is um um providing. And so we hope that we got that clarified uh in in in our discussion this week in our back and forth. Um Time will tell. I I don't know. Uh we don't know who's doing the work. As far as You mean as far as identifying the contamination and and that kind of thing? Is that what you mean? The criteria the person that's going to be doing the testing. Well, we we don't know uh we don't know that. It It's you you would think that it would be an
009LSP. But uh we we really don't know that. Any other questions for That was a great summary. Thank you. Thank you. Um We are um We are grateful for the uh for the input that the public has uh shown towards this project. Um It's taking a long time to uh seems to get into the substance of the discussion, but we will get there eventually. Uh and try to keep this uh on track as best we can. Mark, do you have a any question? Good evening. Mark Soule, 119 Main Street. Good evening. I'm going to try and bite my tongue a little bit. I'm going to try to formulate my thoughts, but I may not be successful. So here I go. This is sounding and it's not this Walpole's fault, but this sounds like a little
010bit of the delays and con- continuances is like it was in the zoning boards. They've had said one thing and then couldn't do the other then they wanted to come back and re- rearrange the agenda and have themselves understand what's going on. They they're they're basically dragging their feet. Don't want to give the materials. Don't want to look it up. And is is there any sort of um I think it's called the uh peer people? Peer review? Yeah. Is it okay? >> do you want me to answer that? Yes. Or you continue? Um we had agreed with the applicants in the first hearing to discuss things in a certain sequence. And the first thing was going to be the contamination issue. The second thing was going to be the flood plain issue. Third thing was
011going to be the storm water issue and the fourth thing was going to be the wetlands issue in that order. And um so we have a peer reviewer for the wetlands. We have a peer reviewer for the flood plain and the storm water. But we have to get through the contamination first. And once we get that information, we will decide whether we need a peer reviewer to review that information as well. We don't have that currently uh because we don't know what we're reviewing with regard to contamination. We we have um uh as I said, we have peer reviewers for the flood plain, the storm water, and the wetlands. Those peer reviews have not been completed yet because we haven't gotten through contamination yet. That make sense? It makes sense and also brings up the
012other thought was when you when this committee went [clears throat] on a site [snorts] um site trip. Mhm. Site walk. And that was not exactly successful in communications either. The The was basically if if I was told right that they they did not either show not show up or they showed up ill-prepared for what what the committee was looking for in that site brief site site review. Is that true? Well, the site We did have a site walk a number of weeks back. Um Ooh. We spoke about that at the last hearing. Um we weren't allowed to go into the building, which was disappointing to at least this commissioner. Um I can't speak for the rest of the commissioners because the building is part of the site. Uh we weren't allowed to go in there.
013So it was it was um less than satisfactory for some of us. And we would really we have requested to do a subsequent one. They haven't agreed to that yet. And by this continuous, they uh that by doing the continuous to the 18th, they probably won't want to agree to another one until they have their way and understanding that the soil that you're looking for, the water, it's it's so on and all that that is the contaminants. They probably have to really find somebody who can teach them to bring forth to this committee to understand what's going on and until then the the continuous is is going to be them dragging their feet to have an understanding to the board and to us in the public of what is actually going in their mind. Well,
014we we have a protocol. We set the protocol, Mark. The Conservation sets the protocol for what we want and what we are reviewing. And that seems to be a little bit of an issue with the applicant. Uh the applicant seems to want to control the narrative. Uh the commission is going to control the narrative. And so once that's straightened away, it would be in their best interest to provide what we're looking for because they're the ones that want to do the project. We're on the Conservation Commission. We're here. We're We're not going anywhere. We're not going anywhere after this is over. We're We're um um We're representing the town here. So it's not in it it would be in at least in my opinion it would be in their best interest to provide for us
015what we need to review. And until >> [clears throat] >> Excuse me. And un- until they provide to you, you don't know what's going to be provided from them un- until they show you. That's true. And that's the problem right there. It's the lack of communication and understanding. And the continuous is having them stall and not be ready themselves. If they understand themselves what that detail is going to be helping or hindering them. Well, hopefully uh we'll have something to review uh in preparation for the meeting in 2 weeks. And it's been how long since how how all the com- all the committees all that stuff, how long has this been out there? Well, we've been meeting since I believe May March 2nd, I think was our first hearing for this. So as far as
016that information that we need, uh I think that we've I think we've been pretty clear, at least from my perspective, as to what we are expecting. Um so we can't do anything about that other than tell them what we need and hope that they provide it for us. Am Am I thing is well, I was just going to come up and and say um they've gone through other committees, planning board, um zoning, the redesign committee, and all that. It's been up for over a year, almost 2 years. Well, that's true. But But they made the choice to not do And I'll get to you in a second, Preston. They made the choice to not do their application to the ZBA and to the Conservation Commission concurrently, meaning at the same time. Um So, we could
017have had this application, had they chosen to file with us at the same time as the ZBA. That would have been a year ago, but they chose not to. We don't have any control over that. Go ahead, Preston. Preston. Preston. You've been recognized by the speaker. Unlike some of the other boards and commissions, like the Planning Board or the ZBA, we do not have a hard clock of when our decision needs to be done. So, if the applicant is slow in getting us the information we want, then we are equally slow in getting the response. Things can move as quickly as the applicant gets us all of the information we need. Uh so, them you know But I not to I don't want to necessarily characterize them as dragging their feet, but other people might.
018Um You know, them being slower than they otherwise could be is their own business and it doesn't make us It doesn't put us in a uh uh difficult situation. It just slows everything down. So, um you know, whether they're slow or fast, you know, different people move at different speeds and we work with the information as it comes in and uh much as I'd like to get this wrapped up quickly and uh efficiently with um with all the proper reviews, uh we're not going to move forward until we have all the right information. And I also Thank you, Preston. I you know that you were at one time the chairman of the Planning Board at one time. And there was a a 90-day clock that was working with the Planning Board. It's some subject Yeah,
019a lot of the Planning Board things have a clock under normal conditions that we If there's a good reason, we'll ask the applicant, "Can we have an extension?" They'll usually agree to it. Um But, um A- And if there's you know, we could always say no because we don't have enough information at the end of that 90 days. You know, that never really happened. But, but yes, it's a different different rules here. That's 3 [clears throat] minutes. >> Okay. Anything else quickly, Mark? Uh okay. I just have to come back to this board. Can that clock be consistently worked if needed on subjects like this? Can that >> clock. There is no hard clock. We have no hard As Preston said, what he meant by a hard clock is we don't have that same clock
020on the Conservation Commission that the Planning Board does. And my question would be why? Because that's a statutory thing with the Planning Board and it doesn't apply to the Conservation Commission. So, it's it's like the Select Board, Planning Board, and Board of Health and stuff like that. But, these boards are separate. This This particular application is separate. Not just this particular application, but applications before the Conservation Commission for notices of intent. And Becca, you might have something? I can just add to that that it comes down to Massachusetts General Law and the regulations. The Conservation Commission under the Wetlands Protection Act does have longer It's not common, but some projects can be before a commission for years. Um There is as has been stated, there's no clock for Conservation Commission like Planning Boards and ZBAs
021have under their laws. And I I also know that the state housing laws is overstepping our bylaws. And maybe they're taking that as advantage to use, too, which is I don't think it's right. I don't think the town should be trumping over its community to which they don't see in their sites with the state house from their state house. They should actually come out and talk and see and talk to the people who live in the town and do the meetings, committees, and all that. And actually understand what's going on. This housing is the housing in the the community Commonwealth is saying short all throughout the state, but if they go inside each town, 350 each town, and do comparisons and compare compromise and compare, maybe they might get a better understanding. Thank you. Okay.
022Thank you, Mark. >> Thanks, Mark. Bill or Bill or Gabe, do you guys have any questions or comments? It also looks like we have a member of the public online. Uh if you'd like to ask a question, we can open that up to you. Let me see uh Mary P. Yeah. No? Okay. So, wait. Anything else? >> to continue? Yeah. Okay. So, we're going to go ahead and continue this. So, do I hear a motion to continue the 10 to 16 Main Street map 14, parcel 128, SLV Ashlin LLC, Carol Lucas Environmental LLC, DEP file number 95-10182 May 18th at 7:05. So moved, Carl. Second, Preston. Roll call vote. Ackerman, I. Crow, I. Crouch, I. Atkinson, I. Molton, I. Ledo, I. Wands, I. The motion passes and the hearing is continued. Okay. Thanks, Mark. Okay.
023We have next on the agenda under other business, review of uh April 13th, 2026 meeting minutes. Um to the commission, I do not have any pre-written comments from Jean this time, so you'll have to pay attention. But, [snorts] I'll scroll through slowly. Did Bill look at it? Bill, did you have a chance to look at these? Uh yes, I did. I had some stuff I found. I'm bringing it up. I can assure you I can't read that fast. I'll slow down. Mr. Ma That's right. Is that correct? That's correct. Tony Ma. Then it should be identified who Mr. Ma is. I'm not entirely sure his exact title, but I can >> he's an engineer. And says form um should be from. I would also I guess this is the first time you've mentioned their names.
024Um should identify their positions. says if clear cutting will be passed or prime meant proposed. I have changed it to if clear cutting is proposed during construction. Um actually, it's 229. That hearings should probably be bearings. >> I think that's all I had. There was a place where uh Mr. Atkinson left the meeting. I didn't see did he come back? >> No, that was the the night that I had to um take care of some other business. >> Okay. I came back but not to this meeting. Okay. If if if you had come back to the meeting it wasn't in the minutes so I just wanted to double-check. >> to make sure that it was that I left the Yeah. And it's looking like all the votes correctly do not have you listed as well.
025Yeah, they changed from 6-0 to 5-0. And then the the last uh page and or two is uh documents. Do I hear Do I hear a motion to accept the April 13th, 2026 meeting minutes as discussed and amended? So moved. Second. Roll call vote. Akerman, I. Crow, I. Crouch, I. Atkinson, I. Molton, I. Tumino, I. Wants, I. Motion passes. The April 13th, 2026 meeting minutes are accepted. Next on the agenda, we have member prerogative, commissioner education, various topics. Does anyone have any prerogatives? Online? I think so. Beckett, if you're out tomorrow, can you swing by uh Grinnell Park to see if they picked up the trash Yes. >> that I have from the cleanup? Cuz I did it on Sunday. Yes, I can check in on that. Yeah. I didn't do Grinnell Park. I just
026did Sudbury River. Got you. Anyone else? No, hearing none. Uh do I hear a motion to adjourn? So moved. Second. Roll call vote. Akerman, I. Crow, I. Crouch, I. Atkinson, I. Molton, I. Tumino, I. Wants, I. Motion passes and the meeting is adjourned. Thank you. Thank you.