Conservation Commission

City of Laconia Conservation Commission Wednesday, May 17, 2023 - 6:00 PM City Hall in the Armand A. Bolduc City Council Chamber Accepted July 17, 2023 5/17/2023 - Minutes 1. CALL TO ORDER Call to order 6:10PM 2. ROLL CALL Dean Anson (Chair), Lisa Morin, Deb Williams (Vice Chair) Mike Foote 3. SALUTE TO THE FLAG 4. RECORDING SECRETARY Sheena Duncan (Conservation Planner Technician) 5. STAFF IN ATTENDANCE Sheena Duncan (Conservation Planner Technician) 6. ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS 6.I. Draft Minutes Of March 20, 2023 Minutes of 3/20 L. Morin motioned to approve with corrections to the header date, seconded by M. Foote, all in favor. 6.II. Draft Minutes Of April 5, 2023 Minutes of 4/5 Motion by M. Foote to approve, seconded by D. Williams with one correction- under section 9.II- correct the spelling of “William” to “Williams” all in favor. 6.III. Draft Minutes Of April 12, 2023 Minutes of 4/12 Motion by D. Williams to approve, seconded by M. Foote, all in favor. 6.IV. Draft Minutes Of May 3, 2023 Minutes of 5/3 motion by L. Morin, correcting the date in the header and a lowercase c under section 8. II, seconded by D. Williams, all in favor. 7. OLD BUSINESS 8. NEW BUSINESS 8.I. Presentation By Luke Frankel Regarding Langley Brook Langley Brook presentation: Pat Tarpey, Luke Frankel L. Frankel discussed the findings of the recent study of Langley brook (prompted by the large quantity of sediment received by Langley Cove from this location). The study identified sources of nitrogen,  8.I. Presentation By Luke Frankel Regarding Langley Brook Langley Brook presentation: Pat Tarpey, Luke Frankel L. Frankel discussed the findings of the recent study of Langley brook (prompted by the large quantity of sediment received by Langley Cove from this location). The study identified sources of nitrogen, phosphorus, and sediment- the three leading pollutants in the cove. The leading sources were identified based on targeted zones, which were delineated by various factors including areas of agricultural use, forested land, urban land an so forth. He explained the data, and future steps that would be added to the report in the for of best management practices, and recommendations to repair conditions effecting various issues, including the highly evident problems with erosion pf the stream banks. Dick Steinhoff- A retired engineer, spoke about the presentation (passing out print outs), indicating that the study does not accurately portray the real issue- the result on Langley Cove. He claimed that the sediment load is in fact many times higher per year, 250 tons per year are coming from Langley Brook. (200 cubic yards, or roughly 16 dump truck loads) Keith Dube and Marjorie Bagley both agreed that the bigger issue was Langley Cove, describing years past when boaters could drive beneath the bridge, and boats could dock- conditions which have been changing drastically over the last 25 years. They spoke about the bars, covered in geese and ducks, contributing to biological pollutant levels in what is Laconia’s greatest source of drinking water. An unnamed citizen spoke up saying that the city has plans to reconstruct the bridge in the next 2 years, and the issue should be addressed before then. Rich Tilton spoke, stating that this group should come together to protect the bay. D. Anson said that a subcommittee involving members of the Commission and citizens could be formed to help address the problems, adding that during the second meeting of the month, members could meet to work. L. Frankel stated that the scope of the study was not big enough to address these issues, and that another study would be needed. P. Tarpey said grant funding was available for drinking water sources, a benefit to the group. L. Morin offered to share the groups contact information with the planning office. 8.II. Conditional Use Permit Review (Wetlands) Lot 375/324/4 On Lexington Drive Bob Gallagher and Peter Howard of DuBois and King explained the changes that had been made to the conceptual plan first show to the commission. The location of the cold storage building was moved closer to the adjacent factory (93 Lexington), farther from the wetland buffer. After a discussion about the slope of the property, and location of suggested silt sox on the top of the berm along the 93 Lexington lot line, it was decided that biodegradable, “Siltsoxx Natural” 18 month should be used anywhere that silt sox would be used and left in place. Motion by L. Morin to approve, with the condition that 18 month, Siltsoxx Natural” be used in areas where sox will remain in place. Seconded by D. Williams. All in favor. 8.III. Conditional Use Permit Review (Wetlands) 48 Lucern Ave Steven Height and Michael Menary of Civil Works Engineering explained that the previous application for this property was for a very different development- the current being only one unit vs 9. They explained the condition of the buffer in the wetland, describing the number and caliper of trees to be taken down. They explained that the new structure would not intrude further into the wetland buffer than the existing house, and that the property currently acts as the drainage outlet for Lucern. D. Anson asked if the existing structure would be removed- it would. He then asked if the configuration of the house could be changed, moving it farther from the wetland boundary- it could not be moved closer to the right of way because it is shared with the neighboring property.  the existing house, and that the property currently acts as the drainage outlet for Lucern. D. Anson asked if the existing structure would be removed- it would. He then asked if the configuration of the house could be changed, moving it farther from the wetland boundary- it could not be moved closer to the right of way because it is shared with the neighboring property. L/ Morin asked about the 3 foot wide ditch- it was left behind by the previous owner who dug it in order to move water sheeting from Lucern away from his home, in the direction of the wetland before it enters the lake, and is currently covered in grass and trees. D. Williams asked how many trees were expected to be removed from the wetland buffer- 6-12 trees at 1’ foot, most of which were either dead or diseased. L. Morin asked who would be overseeing the cutting- Steve noted that on the plan, replacement plantings were planned. D. Williams asked if trees would be removed from the 10 foot buffer- some would. D. Williams noted that normally the commission would make a recommendation that no trees would be taken from the 25 foot buffer. Steve stated that they generally planned for a larger (100 foot) buffer around buildings to prevent trees from falling on the house. D. Anson said that Con Com would produce a set of recommendations to submit to the planning department. Michael described the noted recommendations from the commission- l Keep living trees up to the 25 foot buffer line l Native plantings in the buffer l Plunge pool at the outlet (maintained by the property owner) D. Williams motioned to approve with the recommended changes, seconded by M. Foote, all in favor. 9. NEW HAMPSHIRE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES APPLICATIONS 10. OTHER BUSINESS L. Morin stated that an AI program had been sited as a source in the hand out given to the Commission by Dick Steinhoff, and that as technology advances, the commission must be careful about who and or what will be accepted as credible sources of information. 11. LIAISON AND SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS 12. STAFF REPORT 13. ADJOURNMENT Adjourned at 8:30PM