Representatives for the 300 Baker Avenue proposal updated the Natural Resources Commission on revised site plans and mitigation measures at a hybrid meeting. Dan Feeney of Bales & Thomas said the applicants submitted updated plans after groundwater testing and that the project team had just received a peer‑review response from GPI and Concord engineering.

The applicants described an invasive‑species removal plan and proposed installing granite boundary markers to more clearly mark an existing conservation restriction. Feeney said the team coordinated marker locations with staff and that one marker may fall near a neighboring property; the applicants asked for language that would relieve them of an installation requirement if they lacked permission from an adjacent property owner.

Commission discussion focused on practical and compliance questions the commission must resolve before issuing a final order. Commissioners and staff asked whether placing boundary markers could require permission from neighboring owners, and whether the town could accept purchase of markers to install them if the applicant would not install on private property. Commissioners also raised concerns about existing dumpsters and temporary construction dumpsters located in areas subject to flooding. The commission and applicants discussed adding an exemption to a proposed no‑dumpster condition for existing dumpsters and temporary, construction‑related dumpsters, and whether time limits (for example, 30 days after occupancy permitting) would apply when building permits trigger removal obligations.

Commission staff also briefed the board on current Warner's Pond Task Force activity. Staff said task‑force subgroups have submitted proposals at different times and that the dredging subgroup had provided preliminary cost estimates: roughly $5,000,000 to dredge about 35,000 cubic yards, $6,300,000 for about 50,000 cubic yards, and $12,000,000 for about 100,000 cubic yards. Staff said the Task Force will ask for a second cost estimate and will meet to review proposals before a second public meeting; staff also described a planned randomized public perceptions (CAP) study to inform outreach prior to that meeting.

The applicants told the commission they will respond to GPI peer‑review comments with updated plans and stormwater calculations next week and aim to be in a position for the commission to issue its order if drainage and peer‑review issues are resolved.

The commission did not take a final action on the 300 Baker application at this meeting; commissioners scheduled follow‑up coordination with planning staff and peer reviewers and asked applicants to supply clarifications on bounds, dumpster conditions and timing for any temporary construction activity.