Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-11-6ConCom Minutes for November 6 2019 adopted Nov. 20 CONSERVATION COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING 2 Bathing Beach Road Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 ' ' www.nantucket-ma.gov '.,t !' r_-rr Wednesday, November 6, 2019 }" r' 4 Fairgrounds Road, Training Room — 5:00 p.m. qq r Commissioners: Ashley Erisman (Chair), Ian Golding (Vice Chair), David LaFleur, 9J'T at 11 PPS 12: Q: Seth Engelbourg, and Maureen Phillips Called to order at 5:01 p.m. Staff in attendance: Jeff Carlson, Natural Resources Coordinator; Joanne Dodd, Natural Resources Office Administrator, Terry Norton, Town Minutes Taker Attending Members: Erisman, Golding, LaFleur, Topham, Engelbourg, Phillips Absent Members: None Late Arrivals: None Earlier Departure: None Agenda adopted by unanimous consent *Matter has not been heard 1. PUBLIC MEETING A. Announcements B. Public Comment — None 11. PUBLIC HEARING A. Notice of Intent 1. Mary D. Starr —19 East Creek Road (55-60) SE48-2985 Withdraw request 2. Gregory Reyes —19 East Creek Road (55-60) SE48-3065 Withdraw request Sitting Erisman, Golding, LaFleur, Topham, Engelbourg, Phillips Documentation Site and topographical plans, photos, requisite departmental reports and correspondence. Representative None Public None Discussion (5:01) None Staff None Motion Motion to Approve the withdrawals of SE48-2985 & SE48-3065. (made by: Golding) (seconded bN Topham) Vote Carried unanimously 3. Water's Edge Nominee Trust — 16 Medouie Creek Road (20-26) SE48-3252 Sitting Erisman, Golding, LaFleur, Topham, Engelbourg, Phillips Documentation Site and topographical plans, photos, requisite departmental reports and correspondence. Representative Art Gasbarro, Nantucket Engineering & Survey Public RJ Turcotte, Nantucket Land Council (NLC) Discussion (5:04) Gasbarro — This is the 2nd hearing. He has provided a revised plan, letter and photos in response to requests from the 151 hearing. Reviewed the project work. Changed from having stone type base to using a concrete paver block that vegetation can grow through; this isn't a high-velocity/energy area; this will be upland of the in-place fence. All drains are connected to their own subsurface infiltration chambers. There was discussion on coastal bank stabilization; spoke with the landscape architect about adding a couple of other species to the mix with low -set fiber rolls to protect the toe of the bank. His clients would like to maintain mowing between the boathouse and pier; presented a 1940s photo showing the area around the boathouse mostly clear and mowed. He calculated the linear feet of proposed mitigation sand. We did receive Massachusetts Natural Heritage sign off today with a request to keep existing conditions in place. Erisman — When she looks at the stabilization aspect, she thinks we need a holistic approach and doesn't see the point in putting in a lot of effort if they aren't stabilizing the top of the bank. Looks like it's not just animals but also lazy people going over the bank. The boathouse is an auxiliary structure that could be moved back. We are adding a lot of material to the beaches and not looking at the bank and beach as a whole. Gasbarro — The grade falls back from the bank so there is no real run off going over the bank. The entire face of the bank to the top will be planted, so there will be stabilization. Given this does meet regulations and it's been historically maintained, he thinks there is a way to allow this section of bank to be stabilized. The owners don't want people to walk over their bank. Phillips — Asked if there is a way to condition this to have time to see how it works. Discussion about whether or not there is a way to protect the bank without so much structure or reduce the number of coir rolls to be used. Topham — He's fine with the proposal as is. Engelbourg — Asked if the number of anchors could be reduced or a different anchor used. Page 1 of 7 ConCom Minutes for November 6 2019 adopted Nov 20 Gasbarro — His concern is ensuring the rolls don't break loose. Golding — He can see this as a minimal approach, but he wouldn't want to see it become larger over the years. Engelbourg — _asked if there is an estimate for the area of acreage they want to maintain at the top of bank_ He'd like to see a row of plants behind the top of the bank to indicate no trespassing. Gasbarro — They just want to maintain the already maintained area. Turcotte — NLC asks that the prior order of conditions continued with this. Phillips — She agrees that we need to be careful with stabilization projects; if we allow this, it needs to be clear this is a unique situation. This seems a reasonable alternative for the limited nature of the project; if there's something can be done about the vegetation to make this reflect the natural situation more, that would be fine. Engelbourg — Suggested a planting order that might be more natural looking. Erisman — She doesn't want to see any shrubs being trimmed to keep the view open; that needs to be conditioned; she wants photo monitoring to ensure that. Golding — He thinks the minimum height of the shrubs should be conditioned. Staff Any future addition would require additional permitting. Have everything needed to close. :Motion Motion to Close. (made by: Topham) (seconded by: Engelbourg) Vote Carried unanimously 4. Sixty -Four Walsh Street, LLC — 66 Walsh Street (29-94.1) SE48-3251 Sitting Erisman, Golding, Lafleur, Topham, Engelbourg, Phillips Documentation Site and topographical plans, photos, requisite departmental reports and correspondence. Representative ;dark Rits, Site Design Engineering Public None Discussion (532) Rits — Has a revised plan showing the restoration of grade to the original grade. Asking for a pervious walkway along the side of the house. On the north and south sides of the house the grade behind the wall will be brought back to previous conditions. The plans in the package will be updated to reflect the changes, which are on the plan being used at the table. Staff Have everything needed to close. Motion Motion to Close. (made by: Phillips) (seconded by: Engelbourg) Vote Carried unanimously 5. Cindy & John Galliher — 34 Washing Pond Road (31-13.3) SE48-3250 Sitting Erisman, Golding, LaFleur, Topham, Engelbourg, Phillips Documentation Site and topographical plans, photos, requisite departmental reports and correspondence. Representative .art Gasbarro, Nantucket Engineering & Survey Public Burton Balkind Discussion (5:37) Gasbarro — This is the 2nd hearing; it was held to hear from Massachusetts Natural Heritage, which we received their letter today. Reviewed the scope of work within the buffer to a coastal bank. He had a coastal geological consultant look at the data used to delineate the coastal bank. Balldnd — Wanted to point out that there is a Piping Plover habitat directly to the west. Staff We did a site visit to review delineation of the coastal bank; extra soil work was done regarding transects and glacial material and depth sand; we are confident the delineation is currently correct as shown. Have everything needed to close. Motion Motion to Close. (made by: LaFleur) (seconded by: Engelbourg) Vote Carried unanimouslv 6. *Ronald & Joan Curhan — 44 �leadowview Drive (56-297) SE48-3254 (Cont. 11/20/19) 7. *Eli Zabar — 47 Squam Road (13-22) SE48-3253 Sitting Erisman, Golding, LaFleur, Topham, Engelbourg, Phillips Documentation Site and topographical plans, photos, requisite departmental reports and correspondence. Representative Art Gasbarro, Nantucket Engineering & Survey � Public None Discussion (5:42) Gasbarro — This is for land management work within the buffer to a bordering vegetated wetland. There is honeysuckle and Foxgrape are located throughout the area. The fence will be removed from within the resource area and that site replanted with native species. There will be no use of herbicides; all removal will be manual. Erisman — Asked if they are trying to eradicate the Foxgrape. Gasbarro — No there are areas where the vines are intertwined. Want to get the vines under control and create a more natural habitat. Engelbourg — Foxgrape is one of New England's native species. It has aggressive tendencies, but it is a huge resource to many wildlife species; he'd be hesitant about large-scale removal of it On the wetland delineation list, it shows Porcelain berries, which is very bad; that should be a target of removal. Erisman — Wants to know how we'll know there is a trained horticulturist on the ground to identifi• species. Gasbarro — We have to continue for Massachusetts Natural Heritage; he has a horticulturist in mind and will to talk to her. Page 2of7 ConCom Minutes for November 6 2019 adopted Nov. 20 Engelbourg — He has a concern about the removal of material; a lot of the invasive plants are ending up at the dump. We want actual information about invasive species material taken in at the dump each year. Golding — Asked they get to the percentage cover and the dollar amount of bush Honeysuckle. Gasbarro — Explained the breakdown of the percentage cover related to the dollar amount. Phillips — Asked the purpose of moving and keeping the fence on the property. Gasbarro — It marks the maintained area. Gasbarro — Asked for a 2 -week continuance. Staff During our site visit we saw that some of the bush honeysuckle is tangled up with the Foxgrape; so, there will be some loss of Foxgrape. The ground cover under discussion is all low-lying basic plants; explained how the percentage of cover is calculated to determine the dominant plant within a plot. The original formulas were originally set up in the Army Corps of Engineers Delineation Manual; Mass Department of Environmental Protection put out a separate bulletin that tweaks the original math. Motion Continued to November 20, 2019 by unanimous consent. Vote N/A B. Amended Orders of Conditions 1. 77 Pocomo Road, LLC — 77 Pocomo Road (15-6) SE48-3203 Sitting Erisman, Golding, LaFleur, Topham, Engelbourg, Phillips Documentation Site and topographical plans, photos, requisite departmental reports and correspondence. Representative Jeff Blackwell, Blackwell & Associates Public None Discussion (5:54) Blackwell — He just received enhanced landscape plans, which are more specific on the plantings. You issued an Order of Conditions for the house and landscaping; this is an amendment to that. Pool and cabana are 75 feet or more away from the coastal bank. The landscape plan shows hatching for conservation plantings around the existing lawn area. The path and lawn along the top of the bank was established 10 years ago. Beach Plum and Virginia Rose are proposed. Staff None Motion Motion to Approve the amended order. (made by: LaFleur) (seconded by: Engelbourg) Vote Carried unanimously III. PUBLIC MEETING C. Requests for Determination of Applicability 1. Gerasimos John Gianutsos — 53 & 53R Millbrook Road (56-239 & 240) (Cont. 11/20/19) 2. Cisco Sanctuary, LLC — 5 Bartlett Farm Road (65-14) Sitting Erisman, Golding, LaFleur, Topham, Engelbourg, Phillips Documentation Site and topographical plans, photos, requisite departmental reports and correspondence. Representative Art Gasbarro, Nantucket Engineering & Survey Discussion (5:58) Gasbarro — This is to expand the bathrooms; it is an approximately 100 -square -foot addition located about 75 to 80 feet from the previously delineated and approved wetland. Staff Recommend a Negative 3 allowing the work. Motion Motion to Issue as a Negative 3. (made by: Phillips) (seconded by: Topham) Vote Carried unanimously 3. HMSW, LLC — 25 Sankaty Head Road (48-3) Sitting Erisman, Golding, LaFleur, Topham, Engelbourg, Phillips Documentation Site and topographical plans, photos, requisite departmental reports and correspondence. Representative Mark Rits, Site Design Engineering Discussion (6:00) Rits — This is for a septic upgrade; we will be abandoning the existing cesspit and connecting to an existing sewer line and extending that outside the 100 -foot buffer. All work will occur within landscaped areas. The current pit will be crushed and filled with sand. Erisman — When this becomes exposed, it should be removed; asked if that could be conditioned. Staff Conditions for an RDA are limited but can condition this for that. Recommend issue as a Negative 3 allowing the work. Motion Motion to Issue as a Negative 3 with the condition to remove exposed elements. (made by: Topham) (seconded by: Golding) Vote Carried unanimously Page 3 of 7 ConCom '_Minutes for November 6 2019 adopted Nov. 20 D. Minor Modifications 1. Rothbard — 3 Brooks Farm Road (41-222.1) SE48-3238 Sitting Erisman, Golding, LaFleur, Topham, Engelbourg, Phillips Documentation Site and topographical plans, photos, requisite departmental reports and correspondence. Representative Art Gasbarro, Nantucket Engineering & Survey Discussion (6:04) Gasbarro — Carried forward from the previous meeting. Talked to the excavator, they can keep the bottom of the steel 2 feet above the seasonal high groundwater elevation, which he established at 17. He added a section of temporary sheeting on the eastern side along that other property line. Engelbourg — His concern would be the settling of the sheeting; asked if that happens. Gasbarro — That hasn't happened before. Staff Recommend approval as a minor modification. :Motion Motion to Approve the Minor Modification. (made by: Topham) (seconded by: LaReur) Vote Carried unanimously 2. Dean & :Melissa Long — 11 Pippins Way (43-94.2) SE48-3059 Sitting Erisman, Golding, LaFleur, Topham, Engelbourg, Phillips Documentation Site and topographical plans, photos, requisite departmental reports and correspondence. Representative .art Gasbarro, Nantucket Engineering & Survey Public None Discussion (6:07) Gasbarro — Reviewed the minor modification; exploring going out to South '% alley Road all upland of the previously approved work areas. He had originally sought to permit a septic but now the property can hook to Town Sewer. Phillips — Confirmed the structure closes to the wetland is being rotated to move out of the 50 -foot buffer. Gasbarro — The silt fence location is shown and is previously approved Staff Recommend approval as a minor modification. Motion Motion to Approve the Minor Modification. (made by: Golding) (seconded by: Topham) Vote Carried unanimously E. Certificates of Compliance 1. Cambridge — 10 :\ledouie Creek (20-31.1) SE48-2307 2. Cambridge — 10 Medouie Creek (20-31.1) SE48-1810 Sitting Erisman, Golding, LaFleur, Topham, Engelbourg, Phillips Staff This had a retaining wall constructed without benefit of a permit. The older order is in compliance, the other had the wall, which was removed and is not in compliance. Discussion (6:11) Kevin Dale, Vaughan, Dale, Hunter & Beaudette P.C. — Removed the retaining wall, restored plantings and reseeded the meadow. That order is still open; today asking to issue these two orders. :Motion Motion to Issue as recommended. (made by: Golding) (seconded by: Topham) Vote Carried unanimously 3. Two :Morgan Square Lot A — 2 :Morgan Square (87-3.2) SE48-3138 4. Two :Morgan Square Lot B — 2 :Morgan Square (87-3.2) SE48-3137 Sitting Erisman, Golding, LaFleur, Topham, Engelbourg, Phillips Staff This was for a house, pool, and garage; originally, they were closer to the 50 -foot buffer, after HDC review, everything was moved farther away. Recommend this be issued; it is not more compliant. Discussion (6:13) None :Motion Motion to Issue for both as recommended. (made by: Engelbourg) (seconded by: LaFleur) Vote Carried unanimously 5. Margaret T. Cunningham QPRT — 105 Eel Point Road (32-5) SE48-3076 Sitting Erisman, Golding, LaFleur, Topham, Engelbourg, Phillips Staff We recommend some on-going conditions connected to the monitoring suite: read off conditions to be maintained. Discussion (6:15) Kevin Dale, Vaughan, Dale, Hunter & Beaudette P.C. — Project is complete and in substantial compliance. ;Motion Motion to Issue with on-going conditions. (made by: Golding) (seconded by: LaFleur) Vote Carried unanimously F. Orders of Condition 1. Water's Edge Nominee Trust — 16 Medouie Creek Road (20-26) SE48-3252 Sitting Erisman, Golding, LaFleur, Topham, Engelbourg, Phillips Documentation Draft Order of Conditions Staff Printed out the wrong draft for this coastal stabilization project; read all the conditions. Can add Condition 33 regarding failure criteria. Discussion (6:18) Golding — Asked if there should be failure criteria. :Motion Motion to Approve as amended. (made by: LaFleur) (seconded by: Engelbourg) Vote Carried unanimously Page 4 of 7 ConCom Minutes for November 6, 2019 adopted Nov. 20 2. Sixty -Four Walsh Street, LLC — 66 Walsh Street (29-94.1) SE48-3251 Sitting Erisman, Golding, LaFleur, Topham, Engelbourg, Phillips Documentation Draft Order of Conditions Staff Put in no further buildout by the owner. Wants to add Findings 2 that the order is in response to a Certificate of Compliance request during which it was found the site wasn't in compliance. Discussion (6:22) None Motion Motion to Approve as amended. (made by: Golding) (seconded by: Phillips) Vote Carried unanimously 3. Cindy & John Galliher — 34 Washing Pond Road (31-13.3) SE48-3250 Sitting Erisman, Golding, LaFleur, Topham, Engelbourg, Phillips Documentation Draft Order of Conditions Staff Will add Condition 19 Discussion (6:25) Erisman — Wants the fill around the foundation called out. Motion Motion to Approve as amended. (made by: Engelbourg) (seconded by: Phillips) Vote Carried unanimously G. Other Business 1. Approval of Minutes 10/23/2019 Motion to Approve. (made by: Topham) (seconded by: LaFleur) Carried unanimously 2. Discussion of `Sconset Beach Preservation Foundation (SBPF) — 87-105 Baxter Road SE48-2824 (6:30) Documents used include: letters, emails, reports, Memorandum dated 3 Sept 2019, photos, and list of questions Staff — This is directly related to the letter sent about not receiving two quarterly reports. Sediment source and delivery will be a separate agenda item. SBPF's response to that letter was received by November 1. Steven Cohen, Cohen & Cohen Law P.C., for SBPF — Epsilon responded to the letter; apologized for this, which was an inadvertent mistake. Explained what happened. He has advised his clients that it is not okay to miss reporting dates. Noted that as soon as they realized it wasn't being done, a survey was scheduled and the 41' quarter is scheduled. It's worth noting that in this case quarterly reporting isn't a standard used by Department of Environmental Protection; they request semi-annual surveys. We are recommending that because quarterly is too frequent; SBPF wants to do it in winter and summer; those numbers will show a change. Our surveys indicate no change in the shoreline between the first survey and the most recent. Reiterated the omission was inadvertent, it had no impact, and it has been corrected. Erisman — In science the lack of data does not show that nothing happened. There is no excuse for this; there are enough people working on this who knew the surveys were required. Doesn't agree that the survey indicates there was no impact or change; the coast line is dynamic, and it is important to have these surveys. This is a huge failure in the ability of SBPF to follow conditions on a future project. Engelbourg — This shows a lack of good -faith reporting. Condition 59 requires all work be documented in the quarterly report; with two missing reports, we don't know if work took place during that time frame. Golding — Read Condition 59 requiring work logs filed with the quarterly reports. Cohen — He's not sure the quarterly survey and quarterly reports are the same; the quarterly reports have been done. This was an inadvertent failure to comply with the requirement for quarterly surveys. Engelbourg — Disagrees with the statement, "coastal engineering projects may require different guidance." This is a coastal engineering structure (CES) at a scale not seen elsewhere on the Island and it requires more analysis. Phillips — Referring to the Commission's peer reviewer, Greg Berman; this seems to be cherry picking and taking his comment out of context. Mr. Berman indicated our requirement is in keeping with best practices for a CES project. She finds that disturbing. Cohen — He finds her comment misleading. The entire quote and qualification are included in the letter, he feels that is not cherry picking. Erisman — She's concerned because it was clear in the order, but SBPF wanted surveys to be semi-annual. We never agreed to semi-annual, but SBPF did it anyway, which feels like turning up their noses at us. Cohen — All he can do is ensure this is fixed going forward. Topham — This situation gives him pause about the next project going forward. Engelbourg — It seems to him, SBPF would want more data rather than less; the more data, the less variable in the data going forward. If they had come in before, we could have had a fact -based discussion. Cohen — He thinks a problem with the previous order of conditions is that there is so much information being requested. Golding — Read the statement on page 2 of the Epsilon letter; that makes him feel like missing the reports was a deliberate move on the part of SBPF. Bottom line is SBPF triggered the failure criteria and that is what we should focus on. Carlson — They still have to meet the local requirements of the local permit; there is no pick and choose. He thinks the Epsilon statement is poor wordsmithing. We are looking at that at some point we have to issue some resolution. Under the emergency NOI the Town was a co -application; they were not under the subsequent application to normalize the emergency application, which was denied. While that decision was being appealed, another NOI was submitted. Cohen — Asked if Mr. Carlson has a contract on file that shows what happens. Carlson — We only take in information. Cohen — We can work out with Mr. Carlson on substantiation of contractual obligations. He wants the Commission to be more comfortable with the idea that systems are in place. Page 5 of 7 ConCom :Minutes for November 6, 2019, adopted Nov. 20 Rick Atherton — He had read the letter from Dwight Dunk about this being inadvertent. Based upon an email from August, he feels there was nothing inadvertent about this; it was a conscious decision not to provide the quarterly report Carlson — Reviewed the email in question from the Woods Hole Group engineer, it states they had not been engaged to do the survey. In the end, it is up to the Board to decide on actions the mitigate this happening again going forward. Engelbourg — The Order of Condition specifies the Woods Hole Group. Erisman — asked if this ever happens again, can this Commission require the structure be removed. Carlson — ComCom has a lot of choices, some he needs to check on; you might be able to draft a response to the failure criteria and might be able to require it go on record with the Order of Conditions. Amending the Order requires a public hearing. The Commission has tended to be good about working with applicants about mitigation of the situation but there has to be a punitive consequence if this happens again. Golding — We have to formalize that failure criteria has been met. He'd like to know George Pucci's, Town Counsel, opinion. Erisman — She is wondering about ConCom's level of reporting this to the Select Board, which holds the license and is the property owner. Carlson — If the Commission made an official finding that failure criteria were met, you'd create a document memorializing that and outline conditions to remediate the failure. On the next meeting agenda, you can revisit that with Mr. Pucci here to review it. There are different levels of reporting this to the different agencies involved- RJ nvolvedRJ Turcotte, NLC — He has the Woods Hole Group email; read the email dated August 14, 2019. Mr. Atherton was correct; this is not a mistake. This is a critical moment for the commission; failure criteria have been met and the decision going forward will send a message about how seriously to take the commission. The 791b monitoring report which is technically a summer report but was performed in September, wants to know if the fall report is on its way. The data isn't in a form he has ever seen before; the drone data has been changed to something unrecognizable. Engelbourg — He hasn't had a chance to look at that, but as a zone pilot he might recognize it and will look at it Turcott — Asked if the commission has been involved communications between SBPF and Department of Environmental Protection negotiations. Carlson — The current project with Department of Environmental Protection is under appeal; it's not a negotiation_ Explained what happened with the NOI to normalize the emergency order. He's not away that anyone negotiated a contract with the Department of Environmental Protection. Burton Balldnd — Asked if all the quarterly reports have been filed and if the decision will be forwarded to other agencies. Carlson — Transept surveys come in as work occurs; this applies to the quarterly survey. We have to send a physical copy of any permit we issue out tonight to :Mass Department of Environmental Protection and the property owner if that is different from the applicant. The Select Board will also receive a copy. Balkind — His last point is a pattern of mis-management of the project, part of which is not knowing the rules of engagement. Goldings — agrees with the contention that this was a conscious decision on the part of SBPF. Engelbourg — He agrees; this was not an accident. Erisman — She agrees with 'Mr. Golding. She's not comfortable with issuing an action beyond accepting the finding and getting guidance for Town Counsel. Cohen — He admits he doesn't know what happened. However, to say this was done deliberately and is being falsely represented is wrong; you are basing that upon a third -party email. To say Mr. Dunk submitted wrongful information is not fair. Golding — This email absolutely contradicts what was put in the letter, and :fir. Cohen admitted he doesn't know what happened. He is not withdrawing his comments. Phillips — It does stretch credibility that an operation that has counsel, consultants, and resources has a great deal of unawareness on the part of those experts about what happened. She doesn't want to hear excuses; she wants to hear admission that what happened is wrong and how it will be rectified. Mr. Dunk states that "the screen monitoring will not be accomplished because screen monitoring was not commissioned by our client" Erisman — agrees the email confirms what her gut was telling her. Motion to Accept the Findings that Failure Criteria has been met and that we ask Town Counsel present to advise us going forward. (made by: Golding) (seconded by: Phillips) Carried unanimously Carlson — This discussion will be continued on the next agenda. 3. :Monitoring Report: Schwartz — 62 West Chester Street 4. Reports: a. CRAC, LaFleur — He has to step down; all meetings are doing the day and he can't make them. Motion to Accept Mr. LaFleur's resignation as the ConCom representative to the Coastal Resiliency Advisory Committee and accept the recommendation of Mr. Golding as the representative to CRAC. (made by: Phillips) (seconded by: Engelbourg) Carried unanimously b. CPC, Topham —:Meeting on the 15th to finalize all numbers. 5. Commissioners Comment a. Engelbourg — Feels it is important to have another agenda item about other possible failure criteria SBPF might have met. Carlson — That is already on the next agenda; trying to keep the actions separate; this is a confusing project Phillips — Confirmed Mr. Engelbourg will look at the drone report. Page 6of7 ConCom Minutes for November 6 2019 adopted Nov. 20 Engelbourg — Even if it is data in a form only pilots can understand, that isn't helpful for the commission. Phillips —The SAL report, asked if Staff would look into that. Carlson — Yes. b. Comment 2 6. Administrator/Staff Reports a. The Select Board has opened applications for Ernie Steinauer's vacant seat and hope to make a choice in 2 weeks and have a new commissioner by December. If anyone is interested, file the application with Town Administration. This is seat is only for 6 months, the rest of Mr. Steinauer's term. b. Regular meeting is on November 20; there is only one meeting in December then bounce to January. Hoping to have the 2020 schedule in advance of the next meeting for adoption. Adjourned at 7:30 p.m. by unanimous consent. Submitted by: Terry L. Norton Page 7 of 7