The Open Space Preservation Commission approved by a 2-1 vote a homeowner’s request to remove two trees on OSPC land that would impede sunlight from shining on the homeowner’s planned solar panel installation.

Chair Ed Harrow cast the dissenting vote. He said he did not want to set a precedent of cutting down trees on town land for the benefit of a private person or business. Planning Board liaison Amna Diwan and Select Board liaison Joe Clark did not attend.

Ida Pappas, who lives at 58 Cedar Street Extension, appeared at this meeting to advocate for the tree removal. Her home is located just before the road reaches the Sudbury River. The land that abuts that property was donated to the OSPC as a condition of acceptance of the Turkey Ridge Estates subdivision plans. The eight-lot definitive subdivision, originally known as Deer Ridge Estates, is located at 52 Cedar Street Extension, near the Southborough border.

Pappas explained that the solar company’s representative was unable to attend and that she was advocating for the project. At the last meeting, solar panel consultant Alex Guerra said he had mistakenly marked the wrong trees. Because the wrong information was presented last month, the discussion resumed at this meeting.

She added that she is requesting the removal of a white ash, which she said “looks like it’s dying,” and one other tree. At the previous meeting, a red maple and a white pine were mentioned. She said she would be willing to plant four trees further down on the OSPC land to compensate for the loss of the two trees.

Said Pappas: “We’d be thrilled to put some trees on that strip.”

She explained that the subdivision’s lights shine onto her home at night, so the new trees would help her and the OSPC. Also, she said the solar panels would generate some solar power for the area.

On the rest of her 6-acre property, Pappas said she has “already probably planted 50 trees” that benefit the area.

Member Steve Levandosky asked if trimming the two trees had been considered as a feasible alternative. Pappas said her understanding was that trimming the white ash might hasten its demise.

While Levandosky and member Nancy Peters approved of the plan, Harrow, a self-described “tree hugger,” expressed some concern.

Said Harrow: “To remove trees on town property for private and commercial benefit sets, to me, a huge precedent I am not comfortable with.”

The two trees will be removed before the end of the year.

Potential encroachment issues on Winter Street reviewed

Harrow updated commission members on two potential encroachment issues on Winter Street by private homeowners onto OSPC property.

The issue of a stone wall that appears to extend from 61 Winter Street onto about 15 feet of town open space land has been discussed since last December. The OSPC would like the overhanging wall portion removed.

Harrow said he has had discussions with town counsel, who is “working on it.” Levandosky agreed, adding that town counsel is in the process of requesting a timeline from the property owner via a letter for the removal of that part of the wall.

The chair said he met with the property owner in June to ask about plans to address this issue. Because the owner was on vacation until the end of September, town counsel is pursuing the matter now.

He added that the letter is expected to address “incursions on other boundaries of the property” as well.

The other property discussed was 47 Winter Street. Harrow noted that “nothing has changed” because the OSPC has not received a reply from the property owner after the commission reached out to discuss a potential encroachment issue.

Members voted to have its property surveyed and to delineate the property boundary markers on the back boundary. Harrow said a letter will be sent to the owner of 47 Winter Street regarding the plan.