Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Good afternoon. This is a hearing of the CHAM Conservation Commission being held on May 27th, 2026 in accordance with the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act and the Town of Chadam Wetlands
Protection bylaw and regulations. My name is Karen Latton and I serve as the chair. Please note this meeting is being recorded and will be available shortly hereafter for scheduled and on demand viewing on any smartphone or tablet device. If anyone else is recording the
meeting, including the use of AI notetaking apps, please notify the chair. Pursuant to Governor Healey's March 28, 2025 signing of chapter 2 of the acts of 2025 extending certain COVID 19 measures
adopted during the state of emergency suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law general law chapter 3A section 20 until June 30th 2027. This meeting of Chattam Conservation Commission is being conducted in person
and via remote participation. Every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings as provided for in the order. A reminder that persons who would like to listen to this meeting while in progress may do so by calling the number
1508-9454410 with conference ID 972638430 pound or join the meeting online via Microsoft teams through the link posted in the agenda. While this is a live broadcast and simal cast on CHAM TV Exfinity channel 1072,
despite our best efforts, we may not be able to provide real time access. To all participants, whether attending by phone or online, please remain muted unless you've been recognized by the chair. When recognized, please identify yourself for the record. If you are
attending by phone, you can mute and unmute by using star six. If you are online and you are not a commissioner, please keep your camera turned off unless you have been recognized, indicate that you wish by to speak by using the raised hand feature. So that
we have a record of a quorum, I will now ask each commissioner to indicate their presence. Vice chair Paul Johnson >> present. >> J Williams >> present. >> Elise Gordon is not here. Eric Hilbert >> present. >> Bob Delveio >> present. >> And I'm here. So, we've established that
we have a quorum quorum. If there's anyone who would like to make any announcements, comments, or future agenda agenda items for anything other than the properties on the agenda today, please let me know. Now, I'm not seeing
anyone, no raised hands or anything. Okay. Before we begin the agenda, Bradford, are there any announcements for any continuences? Uh yes, there are four requests for continuance. Uh 45 Old Harbor Lane has
requested continuence to July 22nd. 270 Stage Island Road uh requested to continue to June 24th and 42 Old Harbor Lane and uh lot 59
Oldfield Ben Road have both requested continuences to July 10th, 2020. >> Great. Thank you. At this point, Bradford Bower, Chadam's assistant conservation agent, will now lead us through the agenda. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. First up are
uh orders of conditions. Uh the first one is for 01 130, and 138 Champlain Road for Cornelia K. Atkins map 13A parcels 16B-1B, 16A-2B
and 16 C-3. Uh DP number SC 10- 3 3773. Uh this is for boat house and driveway renovation, d nourishment and landscaping within coastal wetland resource areas. Uh this was continued
from April 8th and April 22nd, 2026. >> Great. Thank you. Hi. >> Hello. >> Good afternoon. I am uh Bob Perry, Cape Cut Engineering. I've been working with Bed Works uh to um put the package
together and we reviewed the uh draft conditions and we're here just to clarify some things. And I know first off some of your conditions are boilerplate which are not always applicable to every project like the no
seaw wall in the future. That's we understand that and I've explained that to the owner and the applicant and to the folks with me today. But there are some that we do want to ask you about. And if I could um ask for your indulgence because it's there's some lengthy stuff and a little bit of
it could be repetitive, but I'll just talk about the permanent guards for a mitigation area. This wasn't a >> So, can you tell me where you are in the >> Oh, yes. So, sorry. It is page 11 I condition special condition number three.
Um, this is not one of those projects where we have a mitigation component to a construction project or or an area that's being developed and the various areas that are being renovated for planting are all over the property. And
to mark those permanently would create a kind of an awkward situation. First off, deciding what to try to mark them with. Um there's going to be several years or more of maintaining these areas that have been scarified of
invasives, but to mark them off with fences or markers or something like that just doesn't seem practical. And I I don't think it has a place in this project. >> Well, but how how will this be protected going into the future? because that's
very standard that we request this >> if if someone was building and if they were mitigating and I know we discussed this activity with you earlier about being mitigation so we could fill out the checklist chart we we had I think it
was I think 15,000 square feet of what might be termed mitigation but it wasn't mitigating a structure or a development so the circumstances of continuity and maintenance will be, I believe, a dedicated mission
of the owner, but I don't think in perpetuity you're going to necessarily find that somebody has to keep everything just like it was. It would be great if they did, but it's reality. And I I believe that with the scope of this
project being virtually the entire property, I don't see how we can market. It takes care of itself because of the interest in managing what will be done. There is no there's
no lawn uh a significant lawn with an area that you can't go into or mow any longer. I think if you looked at the plan and you looked at there's a pathway, are we going to um put fencing on the boundary of the pathway? What would we do? And that's
what we ran into is how would we do this? And I looked into it. I thought about it and I'm explaining my opinion. Um that I don't think this is that kind of project where you've asked somebody to restore a buffer zone and you want to
keep the mowers honest. So you have guards just don't see it here. >> Well, it does it does say on there that it's in if applicable. >> I understand that >> under this is a special condition. >> So it is applicable. >> This one is so I >> Yeah.
>> You know, you're right when you say that the the origin of this is where a a restoration or a mitigation area borders a lawn and it's really to keep landscapers out of and not mow that. So on the one on the coastal bank down on the beach, I don't see any risk of
anybody doing anything in there. That's that's there's nothing happening there. >> But I look at this large restoration area that's uh sort of on the western border of the property, the biggest area. Is that what is it bordering? Is it bordering a lawn? Is there
>> there's a minor strip of lawn or not so much lawn? Because it's occasionally flooded with salt water. It doesn't tolerate >> down in the in the in the wetland part, >> right? >> What about continuing up as you get up toward the house? >> Very little lawn. Um and we're taking a lot of it away. Um
>> what's going to be there when the lawn goes? >> Well, the pathway, >> the plantings >> and the pathway. >> So, what's running between the two planting areas? So, they had the house, a planting area in front and a planting area on the western is a path that runs between those.
>> It's an open area. There's an existing flag stone patio and from there going up the hill there's this pathway which was part of the project which is there and it was going to be um renovated for steps. >> Uh there is there is open ground open ground open area.
>> Yeah, that's the part that >> between the house and the the marsh deposit. Could you could you even run just a um a metal border along the edge of that area that separates it from the the open area or the path? >> Edging like edging. >> Edging. Exactly. Right.
>> Won't there be a hand edge? Won't you have a hand edge? >> Yeah. So, >> I mean it's really negligible and it's the the lower house, which is what I think you're referring to, that's near the marsh. >> Yep. that bed, foundation bed so to
speak, is going to be pulled out and there'll be barely any lawn left. It'll literally be like a walking path lawn. That's how wide it will be. So, I I just I think Larry, the owner, is concerned
about having to have edging in there and markings other than what's natural. The idea of it is it to be natural, you know, meadow type area, >> right? So, you can't put a small >> metal edging that would keep a mower
from potentially going over >> into the m the area that you're planting. It's just and I I get it. You say you can't hold people forever to having these plantings except if this
property ever came back to us. We do look at old plans and we would say, "Wait a minute. what's going on here if something had changed and >> well that's that's actually a great thing to mention because we have an
asbuilt we're going to talk about that in a minute but we have that point in time when this order of conditions is finally given up I I would predict this one might be one that gets extended so you have a total of six years so that
this project can be done >> but you have enforcement provisions available to you. I don't want to say that you're the police of this property. >> No, we're not. >> But but um how best is really the
question to do what it is you're suggesting. Edging will disappear. Uh it's usually at grade and it it is intended to keep >> per lawn out of gardens. Um, signs,
little signs or some small fence posts can often be used where you set them up about a foot or two. No fence rails, but they demark some kind of a line. Um, I tend to look
at this and say, "Yeah, you know, if the project did come back to you and you had a significantly different layout on a plan, you you would have reason to question it." But to put guards throughout this area, and maybe
you're not talking about throughout this area, but it read that way. I I just I I think you're presuming that somebody's going to go wrong and do what they shouldn't do. >> Well, of course, we always have to look
at how to prevent something from going wrong as best we can. We're not there. >> So, which is why we do these provisions, but maybe I'd like to hear what the commissioners have to say. One more thing to say that that I don't want to belabor it but sometimes at least in my
experience when we visit properties and we see a lot of them >> there are varieties being proposed here that landscapers owners I just think of it as a aberration or crime to mow them down you would ruin it so in many ways
the material that's being planted becomes the edge that is observable not a fence >> right that would be Nice. I agree with you. >> Unfortunately, it does happen. We have issu We've had issues where things have
been mowed down because there wasn't that border, hence why we have the provision, but I'd like to hear what the commissioners say if you don't mind. >> It it sounds like we're close to a deal here. I mean, it sounds to me like the members want some type of a, you know, a
border or, you know, even it doesn't have to maybe not continuous, but something that >> there's this, you know, because that's that's the standing point here. And it's pretty common. I've heard this uh board ask for borders pretty much every time. So whether it's a steel edging, whether
it's a small fence, bold, few boulders here and there. I was just going to suggest possibly not massive but meaningful field stones. >> Yes, some stones would work. >> We we're not particular about what you use. We're asking that it be marked. >> Okay.
>> Um we don't we don't go into you have to do this or that because that's up to the homeowner what they might want. >> And we've had people do all different things. The only thing we care about is that it's clear because, you know, at the moment the homeowner knows exactly
where it is. Um, if they hire a new landscaper company, they may not know where it is. And what are the plants on the edge there that are marked as the dots, the black dots? >> Is that the meadow? >> The pro the problem actually with marking it is that the idea behind it is
that they will take over the lawn. There's marsh on the low part, not where the arrow is, but if you go down to the >> Yeah, down here in the marsh area. >> Um, and the idea is that the marsh >> concerned about that. No one's going to be walking down in the marsh particularly. I wouldn't >> Yeah, we're not concerned about the marsh. >> No, we're concerned about where the lawn
used to be where there is some sort of lawn that's going to remain and where there's going to be walking and activity along an area. There's always a risk of somebody stepping into it. >> Isacum grass um meadow type areas. The idea is that that will filter into the
lawn. So I that's I guess my objection to putting a border in that the sense that Larry and Cornelia only want a pathway and they don't need an edged lawn. They don't have if you've seen the site that's not their style, right? >> So it will the idea is that it will take
over the existing lawn and our intent is to remove more of the lawn. So to we want the shazakum grass to grow into it and if you have a border I guess it keeps that from doing that um in a sense but we can do stones if that's what
you'd like. >> Yeah, stones are we do stones a lot of the time. >> Yeah. Anybody else want to say something about it? Bob, >> I'll put my two cents in. >> Good. >> Uh yeah, that's fine. You have some stones, some larger stones give it more
of a natural look. And then what about special condition four uh invasive uh vegetation climbing into those areas? >> We we were going to get into that next. Um it has to do with maintenance and it's my understanding I can let these
folks speak to it. Uh there's a plan to continue with you don't do that become over >> that's probably just as important if not more important. >> Oh yeah. uh just to keep those invasives from uh climbing into your your plants and
>> 100%. Yes. Yeah. We wouldn't go through all this work and then >> Yeah. >> let it be. Yeah. That's definitely the commitment right >> of the homeowner. Ter of us. Yeah. >> For sure. >> I don't think we have a boundary between non-native and native when it's done.
>> So the mode is sort of a stylized again if applicable thing. >> Yeah. Yeah. I don't think that that will be applicable here. The mode strip. >> No, I I I do agree that you want these things to work in for as long as they possibly can. And I've never looked at
this project as one that where somebody was doing anything except uh improving. And the the um you know, if the markers become a nuisance, I think that's kind of what we're trying to avoid. >> So, what else did you have? Okay.
>> So, we >> we're into stones on number three. So, number four, we just touched on it. >> Yeah. >> And there's no objection, of course, to that. Number five looks fine to us. Um the annual survey of the coastal beach. Now, I'm in the business and it I don't
believe there's a need to do that. In three years, there will be a potential asbuilt plan. If they close out the order, if they choose to extend it, there won't be. But to survey the beach annually um uh it strikes me as there needs to be
a reason to do that. Now this project puts the boat house back in order. It did propose a dune ridge of of donated sacrificial sand and I think everybody would be interested to know what will happen to that if if it becomes
overwashed. But that can be observed by viewing it. And if someone were to want to add more sand, that would be a good point in time to provide you with elevations. But to require an annual
survey of the coastal beach area, that's a pretty ch good chunk of land and it's a fairly expensive thing to do. And on behalf of the applicant's concerned for that, I'm asking for it not to be in here because it doesn't seem needed.
>> And we could cover some of that in the annual report as well with pictures. >> We we could trigger the requirement by the application of nourishment that if you do apply nourishment to that dune, then that would that would trigger
a requirement. That makes sense to me. Measure to not just observe it, but measure what change has that done to the beach. We've seen a number of instances where the nourishment has >> made its way down and has, you know, greatly enlarged the beach area. >> Hope so. >> You know, I think the reason we put this
into special conditions was that not every owner >> necessarily observes what's going on their property, >> right, >> until it's way too late, >> right? >> And we're trying to prevent too late. >> Well, yeah, I get it. But um I think
that the baseline for that point in time okay we are modifying it. So >> that's good to hear >> it it if in the event that nourishment is applied to the dune >> a survey >> a survey of the area shall be conducted.
>> Makes sense. >> Very good. >> Okay for that. Anything else? Yes. I going to turn the page past eight and nine. >> And um there was a question about the supervision. And I >> about supervision where? >> Oh, sorry. Item two on pre-construction
conditions. >> Okay. And did you notice that at the top of standard conditions? Where was it? Shoot. Maybe it's not in there. Oh, it's before special conditions that says except as otherwise specifically notes
on Oh, wait. On plans these conditions apply as and to the extent they are applicable. And if there is any conflict or inconsistency between standard and special, special shall control. They're
they're bolded for the reason that not every preconstruction uh note is >> is re you know relevant to every single property. So that's why and it's bolded
so everybody knows that we otherwise we are modifying every con everything >> understand >> for each and every property. >> Yeah, I've seen a bunch of your orders. I know they're they're standard boiler plate and and they're as applicable and yet um they just wanted to clarify it
seems that Bed Works would be a good supervisor and they were concerned that there might need to be a third party. >> No, no, we're happy with that. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> And then um is is item four. Um, right now the site I believe was
marked out for the project. >> This is not a building project. Will will you actually require that all of these resource areas, coastal bank limit, buffer zones all be marked out before they begin their work? >> Well, I think usually they're just kept
there from what's been staked already. >> That's that's very much what we think. Well, that's all it's saying is that no, don't take them out before the work before, >> right? >> This is before construction. Don't remove what you've put in.
>> Right. Okay. Well, I don't think you could really see any of the markers of, say, for example, the buffers or the coastal banks because they're just absolutely buried in the in the Parker brush. >> Well, but what you have marked, we're just saying don't remove them.
>> Okay. You okay with that? >> Fair enough. Yeah, I mean it will they will get damaged. >> Well, then you just put them back in again where they were. >> Yeah. Yeah, >> Madam Chair, >> we'll do our best. >> Just checking. Okay, so um moving on uh
to page 11L. Um again, I think we we um settled the question of supervision. That was number eight. That was my only uh concern that was re uh referred to me. And after that, I don't have anything else marked.
>> Oh, great. >> And I would would defer to bed works folks uh to tell if there's anything they have. >> Okay. >> Noted. >> No, I think we covered everything. >> Great. >> Okay. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. Um then I think anybody on the commission have anything
that they'd like to modify at this point? We've heard theirs. No. Okay. Then we can have a motion. Well, I'll ask you because you're not going to ZBA until tomorrow, >> correct?
>> Uh, we have two options. We can close the hearing and approve this, but if ZBA has issues, you would have to come back with an amended order, right? >> Or we can hold off and put it on the agenda for June 10th.
And then as long as ZBA had no issues, all it would entail at that time is a motion to close and approve. >> It was my understanding at our last meeting that this hearing would occur >> and that you would vote. >> Well, sometimes
>> next hearing on a formal order of condition. >> Sometimes people want it right away. That's why >> I get it. I get it. But we're headed to the ZBA as you say, >> right? >> You never know. Caution. We can wait. >> Okay. Perfect. So just if we could continue it to June 10th.
>> I move that we continue 01 130 and 138 Champlain Road >> to the meeting on June 10th. >> Second. >> Well, thank you very much. >> I Paul Janet. >> Hi. >> And I say I thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Thanks. >> So we'll have to see you again then. >> Yeah. >> Well, we we may not if it's all on automatic at that point. Thank you anyway. Bye. >> That's true. >> True. >> Next. Bradford, please. >> Next is an order of conditions for 70
Queen and Road, a jar management company, map 13E, parcel 15-14, SC 10-3781. This is for construction of a new ADA ramp, drainage improvements, and site landscaping.
>> Okay. Do we have anybody for 70? Seeing no one online and no one here. Um, >> hello. It's Paul Mahoney with Hzar Management. >> Hi. Okay. Did you read the order? >> Uh, yes. Actually, Scott Rogers is there
representing us here. He's the one that's going to be a little smarter about all this. >> Okay. >> Scott, are you there? >> Yes. I see a hand raised now. Scott, go ahead. >> Am I muted? >> No, you're not. So, we uh we did review the order of
conditions, the draft order, and we just had one uh typo that we'd want to mention to you. >> Okay. >> On page 11D, about halfway down the page, uh next to the
quotations, accessible route, uh there's just a a misspelling in the word also. Also, >> it >> it's been text. >> Oh, okay. I was going to say it says ALSO. Okay. That was actually we copied that
out of your application. >> So just so you know, >> we don't touch that. Um okay. Uh now again, as with the previous one, you're not being heard until June 25th.
So you have two options. We can close the hearing and approve this today. And if anything changed with ZBA, you would need to file an amended um order and or
we can hold off till after June 25th, which the next hearing would be July 8th, and we can close the hearing and approve it at that time. Um, my opinion is I'll see if Paul agrees with me, but I think based on
what you had just said, we should probably wait till after the ZBA hearing on June 25th. >> Okay, >> that's fine with me too, Scott, as well. >> So then we will um and since you had no changes or anything, it'll be very quick
at that time if ZBA is fine with everything. So we will continue you until July 8th. if that's okay because that's our next meeting after June 25th.
>> Very good. >> Okay. >> I move that we continue 70 Queen Anne Road to the meeting on July 8th, 2026. >> Second. >> Bob, >> I >> Eric >> I >> Paul >> I >> Janet >> I. And I say I. Okay. Thank you very
much. >> Thank you very much. >> All right. Next one, please. Next is a notice of intent for 45 Old Harbor Lane, Holly Todd. Um, map 16i, parcel 6-1-mr1.
Uh, D number SE 10-3776. Uh, this was for proposed house and site improvements. Um, the applicant has continued requested a continuence to July 22nd. >> Okay.
I move that we continue. >> I move that we continue 45 Old Harbor. >> She's online. She want to say something about it. >> Who? >> Oh. Um, who's online? >> Holly Todd. >> Holly Todd. The
>> owner. Um, Holly Todd. Did are you here for this property? >> Yes. No, I I think Leslie Schneberger, my architect is or or Sean, sorry. But I am here. >> Okay. Did you want to say anything or
you just wanted to hear if it it >> I just wanted to hear. >> Okay. >> What's happening? >> Perfect. Thank you. >> All right. So, we can do the >> I move that we continue 45 Old Harbor Lane to the meeting on July 22nd, 2026. >> Second.
>> Bob. >> I. >> Eric. >> Hi. >> Paul. >> Hi. >> Janet. >> Hi. And I say I. >> Okay. The next please. >> Next up is a notice of intent for 93 Woodland Way. Uh this is for Peter and
Dana Agnes, map 12K, parcel 17-HC36, EP number SE 10-3775. This is for proposed shed and removal of existing patio and mitigation plantings. It was continued from uh April 22nd,
2026. Okay. Do we have anybody? It looks like we do >> indeed. Good afternoon. My name is Jake Fricki. I'm professional land surveyor with Cape and Islands Engineering representing the homeowner for this project on Woodland
Way. As noted, this is continuence from a hearing for a notice of intent application for the proposed construction of a garden shed. A brief recap of the project. Uh the applicant is proposing to remove a 118 ft patio
located within the 0 to 50 foot no touch zone and construct a 97 96 ft shed on sun tube footing within the 50 to 100 ft buffer zone. Uh the area of the patio is
that to be removed will be replanted with New England seed mix. Uh there are two trees in close proximity to the proposed shed which based on commission input are going to be pruned and protected during the construction process. There's also two plethora of
bushes which are within the footprint of the shed which will be relocated within that same planting bed on the left side of the property. As the net change in structures and hardscapes within the no disturbance uh zone and outer R is negative, we're not showing any
mitigation for this proposed work. We are however showing proposed um mitigation that was previously approved under order of conditions 10-2817 with a certificate of compliance issued in 2014. This area is located along the
landward edge of the top of the coastal bank in an area which is currently lawn. Um the staff comments were that we needed to identify the the plant species within this mitigation area. And so based on the plant selection from the former planting prepared by Wilkinson
and recommendations from the ecologist at Bartlett, we're proposing a mixture of polyentia, New Jersey tea, and sweet fern as identified on the notes. We believe these revisions address comments from the commission and request the
commission to prepare and order conditions for the work as proposed. I'm happy to take any questions. >> Okay. Thank you. Anybody? Go ahead. >> Not a question but a comment. Um, as somebody who for a number of reasons is doing some research on um available
native plants in this area and the name New Jersey Tea caught my attention because I thought, is that a hybrid of some sort? um and looked it up and sure enough know it is native to New England and it is beautiful. So it is going on my list. So it is thank you for for letting me know about that. Um it's
really a great choice. So >> yeah, I've seen it. It's very nice. I >> it's nice and compact. So it's it's something that we should be encouraging people to, you know, who are looking for good like foundation plantings, right? Would be great. So anyway, that was my only comment.
>> Okay, Paul. >> Yeah. First of all, I'd like to to thank you for trying to save those uh pine trees behind the back side of the shed, but I just noticed listening to cuz you said you were going to prune the two trees, but on your revised plan, it just
says existing tree to be pl pruned and protected. But we're talking about two trees, right? >> Uh I did call it existing tree. You're right. I missed the S. The there's there's two trees which are circled.
>> Yeah. Okay, that's fine. >> And it's those it's those two. Maybe this is it should have maybe said existing tree to be pruned and protected. Typical uh and that would have captured it also, but it's those it's those two. >> Okay. Thank you so much. There's two of them. >> Perfect.
>> Anybody else? >> Bob? >> Uh hi. Um the uh I like the uh vegetated buffer strip there that you have there. Uh uh the mitigation area now. How is that going to be protected? Because
there is lawn up against uh that uh northern edge. Did did you come up with an idea for um some kind of edging or something just so uh you know people can tell where it starts.
>> Right. Right. I I heard you work through this with the right with the former projects there. Um >> yeah, I was going to say to you that it's going to be in our order, so we'll need >> Right. Um >> maybe you can discuss it with the homeowner maybe too.
>> Yeah, I'll I'll work with the homeowner and uh the the contractor that's doing the installation on um on what what seems most appropriate. But I I think that we certainly can come to some agreement about something be it a
combination of stones or perhaps an edge as you identified. This is a lawn which uh which will be right up against those plantings and so uh so we'll want to we'll want to be able to identify that edge uh for uh for maintenance purposes.
>> Thank you. >> Anything else then? And I think we can go to an order. And how soon do you need this? >> Uh, I mean, the sooner the better. Um,
you know, I I don't know what your schedule looks like, but >> we could do June our next meeting's June 10th. We could do it for that. >> Uh, let me see. Uh, let me check my schedule here.
Uh >> yeah, the 10th. Uh the 10th is good for me. >> Okay. Then if we could have a motion to continue it to June 10th for an order. >> I move that we continue 93 Woodland Way to the meeting on June 10th, 2026 for an order of conditions.
>> Second. >> Bob. >> I. >> Eric. >> Hi. >> Paul. >> Hi. >> Janet. >> Hi. >> And I say I. Thank you very much. >> Thank you all so much. Have a good Have a good day. >> You too. >> Okay, the next Bradford, please.
>> Next up is a notice of intent for 357 Stone Hill Stony Hill Road. Uh for John Hernandez, map 14I, parcel 2B-25B, D number SCE 10-3765. Uh this is for a proposed swimming pool
and was continued from March 11th, 2026. Okay, I Lindsay, I see you have your hand up. >> Yes, I just wanted to present this one to you today. >> All right,
so my name is Lindseay Cook. I'm from Parter Ecological. Um, I'm going to present you with an updated design and mitigation plan that we created after the March 11th hearing. So after your feedback during that hearing, we reduced
the size of the patio. We shrunk it from 9 ft to 5t and pulled it back from the no disturb zone. And we also increase the mitigation area substantially. Just in case you forget this one, this is a pool and a patio within the um 50 to 100 buffer.
>> Right. >> The resource area here is an isolated wetland presumed to function as a vernal pool. The wetland is in really good shape ecologically. It has a diverse array of wetland plants surrounding it. However, as you move away from the wetland and towards the residents,
invasive species have begun establishing themselves in that edge habitat zone. Our plan is to remove these invasive species and plant the buffer zone with native trees, shrubs, and perennials to protect against future invasive encroachment and to provide habitat for the wildlife that lives in and around
the wetland. In doing this, we were also able to connect the two previously designed mitigation areas to allow for continuity. In our updated plan, we're proposing to remove three invasive trees. Two are grey willow and one's a sycamore maple.
And we have one compromised pitch pine that we are also proposing to remove. We're replanting with 14 native trees. We also plan to remove invasive shrub honeysuckle, multifllora rose, and asiatic bittersweet over 4,030 square
feet area. We will flesh cut these species and paint their stems with a wetland approved herbicide. There's also garlic mustard present, which we will treat with an herbicidal foam when it's seasonally appropriate. We propose to complete the initial removal during the winter months so as not to disturb
nesting birds. We are also proposing to remove a 475q ft gravel seating area and replace it with native plantings. Once the invasives have been removed, we will plant back the area with the 14 native trees I previously mentioned, 103
native shrubs, and 250 native perennials. Additionally, a 495 ft section of lawn will be removed and planted with a native wildflower and grass mix to further increase habitat type and value on the property. This represents 5,000 total square feet of
mitigation for the proposed 1 1500 square ft of new hardscape. Essentially, we are creating a more ecologically diverse shrub and woodland, a native perennial garden area, and a native wildflower meadow. And connecting all of these habitat types for easy movement among them by pollinators and wildlife.
Implementing this design would help to strengthen the resilience of the wetland buffer, protect the health of the species that are there currently, and add ecological diversity at all layers of the plant community. This provides significant improvement from the current conditions. >> Do you have any questions?
>> Well, we have somebody else here, so let's hear from him and then we'll go to questions. >> Good afternoon. I'm I'm Jack Olri with Strong Tree Engineering. I work with Lindsay. Okay. And we prepared we we we had prepared the original plan and have subsequently removed all plantings to
allow her to do her work. And I can't add anything to what she said. She nailed everything. Okay. >> Except we did take a look at the grading in the garden walls when we moved the pool um >> changed the pool area in response to your comments and we were able to take out one of the garden walls entirely
which helps with the continuity of the uh the rest the um the plantings. >> Okay. >> Thank you. Thank you. Um, anybody want questions? Go ahead, Eric.
>> Good. >> Man of many words. >> Um, anything else? >> No. Bob? >> Yeah. So, you reduce the uh size of the patio. >> Yes. >> Um, and then you going to remove some
invasives. going to add a lot of natives. So, I I think it's a it's definitely a better plan than than the previous >> Yes. >> Uh so, thank you. >> Thank you, >> Paul. Janet, either of you have anything? >> No, just um thank you for listening and
um I think I'd be happy if all you know plans and proposing swimming pools and patios uh ended up looking like this, but >> Yes. >> No. All right, then. I think we can go to an order. And
let's see, how soon did you need this? >> Um, as soon as possible. It sounds like uh your last applicant had a date in mind. >> Yes. Um, June 10th is the earliest. We could do June 10th or June 24th. So, you want June 10th?
>> We prefer June 10th. Yes. >> Okay. So, >> sorry. The applicant John is here, too. Uh >> I move that we continue 357 Stony Hill Road to the meeting on June 10th, 2026 for an order of conditions. >> Second.
>> Bob, >> I >> Eric >> I >> Paul >> I >> Janet >> I say I. >> Thank you. >> Yes. >> Thanks very much. >> Go ahead. >> Thank you everyone. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Next up is a notice of intent for 270
Stage Island Road. SX FELS Partners LLC. Uh map 13A2, parcel 3- D166. Uh D number SCE 10-3780. This is for demolition of an existing
structure. Oh yeah. Existing structure and construction of a new single family dwelling uh with septic tank upgrades, rear deck, soak poolool, landscaping, and associated site work. Uh, the applicant has requested a continuence to June 24th, 2026.
>> I move that we continue 270 Stage Island Road to the meeting on June 24th, 2026. >> Second, >> Bob. >> I, >> Eric. >> I, >> Paul. >> Hi, >> Janet. >> Hi. >> And I say I. >> Next. >> All right. Next up is a notice of intent
for 54 Rowland Drive. Uh, this is for Timothy and Katherine White. Map. Essie. M. Oh my goodness. Map 13J, parcel 19-4, uh, D number SCE 10-3782.
This is for demolition of a detached garage and driveway and construction of a new driveway and garage with living space above within the buffer zone to a coastal bank and bordering vegetated wetlands. A portion of the driveway is within land subject to coastal storm flowage. This is a new application.
>> Good afternoon. David Clark, Clark Engineering, and Mike Tannis from Blue Flax Design. Um, so as stated, um, we're here, uh, because we'd like to, uh, well, the applicants would like to
remove an existing garage, uh, and rebuild it primarily in the same location, uh, and also change the configuration of, uh, the second driveway on the property. Uh the resource areas are a coastal bank um which we show on the
plan. Uh the land form is uh is steeper than 10 to one but less than 4:1. So the 10-ft flood plane contour is one and the same as as uh the the coastal bank. Um this is more of a
regulatory bank in that uh the flood plane uh originates in Frostfish uh Creek uh which is on the other side of Roland Drive and there was a former
salt marsh cranberry bog here uh that was partially filled in when Roland Drive was built uh back in the 1960s. So, it's it's still connected to uh Frostfish Creek uh by a culvert under the road um which allows the flood
waters to come in, but the the land form really doesn't serve any function as a as a coastal bank, but it meets the text technical definition of a coastal bank. Uh we also had the limits of the uh salt marsh BVW flagged by blue flags and we
show those delineations on the plan. Um so the primary reason for this is is that um the existing garage is is barely functional. Uh it functions for one car
uh but not for two. Um and its configuration is is kind of pointed. It's skewed from the driveway, so it doesn't really make it convenient to get in and out of it, even for one car. And
there's no turning area for a car there. So, the the owners have to back down all the way down into roll and drive. Um, so that's the main purpose for this is to to make the garage accessible or big enough that you can get two cars in
there and have a maneuvering area to get into the garage uh right out in front and uh to solve the problem of backing down onto Roland Drive, creating a a circular driveway so cars can can back
into that area and then exit out. Um the net increase in the no disturb zone is is quite a bit,200 square ft. Um 170 square ft of that or so is the garage expansion. Uh and the rest is is really
the reconfiguration of the driveway. Um there is already a second driveway on the property um with some retaining walls um within the path of the the proposed driveway. Um and that's the
route we chose uh to to keep the undisturbed areas of the property as undisturbed as possible. uh for this um an extensive amount of mitigation is required for this 1,200 square feet and
and Mike is here to talk about that. Good afternoon. Mike Tannis from Blue Flax Design. So existing conditions, most of the coastal bank is naturally vegetated with an oak tree and pitch pine canopy. However, invasive black locust trees have become established in
open areas where there were no native trees. The understory has a few native trees and shrubs. Black cherry, bay berry, viburnum with uh beckeris down near the salt marsh high tide bush. However, these native shrubs are overgrown with invasive shrubs and vines. Bittersweet shrub honeysuckle,
porcelain berry. Native but aggressive raspberry forms a large thicket near the top of the bank with the ground cover being invasive English ivy beneath it. The upland area along the eastern and southern property lines is densely vegetated but heavily invaded with shrub
honeysuckle border privet and autumn autumn olive. The front of the house is landscaped with a variety of or ornamental trees and shrubs both native and non-native. And here invasive English ivy has also taken hold. It's
overgrown the rock retaining walls as well as most of the ground under that ornamental landscape. To mitigate for the uh the construction of the garage and driveway, we are proposing approximately 10,121 square ft of native plant restoration
through invasive plant removal and native plantings. Uh the project will begin with an herbicide pre-treatment, basil bark treatment. Um, and then about a month later, we will cut and remove the invasive plants either mechanically or
by hand. We're proposing that six native pitch pines will be removed. Some for the construction of the driveway and others are hazard trees that are damaged by tarpentine beetle and close to or leaning toward the house. We're also proposing an additional eight invasive
black locusts on the coastal bank will be removed. Um any native ve vegetation that has been damaged by vines may be flush cut or regeneratively pruned to promote healthy regeneration and vigorous growth. After the invasive species
removal is completed, the project area will be seated with a custom mix of native warm and cool season grasses and wild flowers. We have two different mixes, one for shadier areas and one for more open sunny areas. Uh woody vegetation will be planted
after the growing season. And so we'll have one growing season to to treat returning invasives and then we will plant woody vegetation. We're proposing 22 native shrubs, 17 native grasses, and 25 native trees to be planted.
The landscaped area in front of the house where the driveway is going will be redesigned and planted entirely with native plants. I'm not counting these areas as mitigation because they're not contiguous and connected to the other habitat. They're kind of islands, but uh
they will be densely vegetated with native plants and still provide high habitat value. Uh areas around the house where the in white and over the septic will be seated with a fescue and clover mixed and maintained as Cape Cod lawn, no
fertilizer. Um temporary irrigation may be installed for the first two to three growing seasons while plants establish. Once plants are established, the irrigation will be removed. follow-up invasive species management will be ongoing over the life of the permit.
And at this point, I would be happy to answer any questions. >> Thank you. Any commissioners want to start? >> I can go ahead Paul. >> Hi, Michael. How are you? >> Good. How are you? Um I'm a little
concerned with the percentage in the 0 to 50. you're going you're going up to 44%. And my question would be, is there any way we can reduce the size of that
proposed circular driveway to maybe reduce that and get that back down to close to 35%. >> Or whatever. >> There's no way to to get it that low. That's a >> no area.
And then then my other question, within that proposed circular driveway, there's a little uh cypress tree that I don't see mentioned as a tree to be removed. And
that's a beautiful little specimen there. It's almost it's almost opposite the steps that go down from the patio >> over here. Uh, >> and it's in the proposed driveway
>> and according to >> have been so small that we missed it. Um, >> it's it's about it's probably about 6 feet tall. >> Yeah. Yeah. Then we definitely probably missed it. Um, >> so it's probably >> Yeah, it's a little Haninoi Cyprus.
>> Okay. So, that would obviously need to be removed. Yeah. The drive >> driveway. That's all I have. >> Sorry, Teresa Sprag with Bluefax Design. That small Haninoi Cypress could definitely be transplanted. It's small enough that it could be transplanted.
Um, so that's definitely look at that. Um, again, we were mainly focusing on the 50-ft buffer and restoring all everything with native vegetation that has to be removed for um for the driveway construction. Um, as far as the driveway, um, the semic-ircular
driveway, I just want to add that we we did spend a significant amount of time trying to design this driveway because it's a very difficult, um, that's a tough project >> to get in and out of. And this was the smallest footprint um that we could really come up with that would allow for
access and circulation and then is allow us to back down the driveway, have a turning point um to turn around and then pull forward out onto Roland because Roland A is so narrow um that it's difficult to back out onto Roland and
turn. So that was just to give you some background process behind our thinking in the driveway layout. >> Thank you, Teresa. Go ahead, Eric. >> Um, I'm a little I'm more sympathetic with the uh with the percentage and
because of the layout. Um, let's face it, it's across from an asphalt road. Uh, I'm more and I think the emphasis on I think the wetlands really is more important on the north and I think you're doing a really good job there.
Uh, you went deep in there for invasive control. I think this is as for what you got. This is I mean the best that can be done. Uh you definitely need the driveway. You need the space to you know
to turn around. Um I I just for what for what you have here I I don't I I think this is um in my opinion a good plan. Thanks >> Janet.
So, I'm looking at the plan from Blue Flax called Hardscape and grading plan, but it also seems to be one that's showing the proposed trees to be removed, which I count as 13. And they're they're not identified, so I don't know.
>> I have 14, but yeah, they're not >> one, two, three, four, >> because six and eight is on this one. >> Oh, okay. Uh, you're on a different Yeah, they gave us two plans that have trees show trees coming out, but it
according to the notes, it's 14 trees. And so I don't know sizes, but it has to be at least 28. This is the It's called mitigation and planting plan. >> That's not in the not in the >> as opposed to the >> Okay, thank you.
>> Hardcape and grading plan. Yeah, that's why I was looking at it going it's but in the file that we in the digital file it's called planting plan. So I pulled it up and said huh >> yeah that's not really what I would expect to see um on a planting plan
>> but we don't know sizes of trees and it they're all in the >> So now I see that this has got 14 on it. This is all plus plus the cedar now we're saying so that's 15 >> um yeah need to be >> we need more trees. The seedure is being remove uh changed. So that's okay. It doesn't have to be on as removed, but
>> but we need more trees. >> What do we have coming in? >> 25. >> There's eight invasive >> right >> on the bank. And then there's one, two, three, four, >> six pitch. >> Five, six pitch pines.
>> Yeah. I can't but I can't I couldn't tell which are which on this. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Which are the invasives. If you go back to the um hardscape plan, the pitch pines are shown with the spiky circle and then we're showing the locations on the coastal bank with the X's. Those are
the black locust trees that don't have the >> six, seven, eight of those, right? >> Correct. Yep. So that's the eight locust. Yep. And then the pitch pines that are coming out are um one of them is coming out for the driveway. The others are just in very poor condition and we would consider them hazard trees.
And we are proposing 25 trees to be replanted um for the 14 trees that we're proposing to remove. Um and >> that's in the NDZ. So it's at least 2 to one. >> No, >> not the number of trees. Oh, >> number of trees are driven solely now by
the >> size and we don't have size. >> Yeah. Well, invasive are always one to one. That's never going to >> Yeah. And the one other thing I wanted to point out about the opportunity that we have on this plan is we have actually done a full restoration at the abuing
property at 70 Roland Drive. Um, and so this this property and this salt marsh directly abuts the 70 roll and drive property. So this really gives us an opportunity to to continue that connectivity all the way around. So
we've we've restored all the way around the Salt Marsh at 70 Roland. >> Fantastic. So, we really felt like this was a a really nice opportunity for us to um to restore some connectivity around this entire salt marsh. >> So, I think one of our biggest questions
is how do people feel about the driveway, which is very large in >> it. It is large. I am um I take uh Eric's point that it's on the landward side of the asphalt road. So, um I'm not
all that concerned about uh um that aspect of it. Um and I'm so happy that you're taking out the asphalt driveway, replacing that with something that is truly permeable. Um and you're shrinking the uh shell
driveway down. So, >> and they're having a and they're having a Cape Cod type lawn, so it's not even an irrigated lawn. So you can't get, you know, compared to compared to what we >> do with it with NDZ, you know, ver alternatives analysis. Given all of that
and what you're doing, I'm I'm I'm okay with this. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> I just want to make sure everybody >> this I knew something was missing. >> There's there's some administrative things that I would like to talk about. Also, we have two outstanding orders which we're we should file next week. They're pretty much prepared.
>> So they'll be on June 10th. Um, this has to go to zoning board of appeals, >> right? And that I was going to bring up that you're scheduled for June 25th. >> So, I was going to ask if we continue to July 8th.
>> That's probably not a problem in that both your order and zoning board of appeals aren't going to allow work till after Labor Day. >> Right. >> Anyways, so >> all right. >> Um, there's one more thing off the south end of the house. There is a very large pine tree that's down on the ground came
down in the blizzard. >> Yeah. >> Um one of the the abuter to the south called and had concerns about the project. So north so naturally I was on panic mode and then I talked to him. He says no can you just get rid of the tree because it's on his propert about threequarters of it's on his property.
So I just want to note that that there's a down pine tree we will also be removing. >> Okay. >> Can I ask a few questions? >> Sure. Definitely. >> Thank you, Karen. Um, yeah. Now, on the
U in the uh marsh area uh to the to the north, uh some of those are cherry trees as well as locust trees. >> Yes. >> Yes, the cherry trees will remain.
>> Are they in good enough shape to leave or >> I I believe so. I mean, once we do the invasive removal, we'll reassess and if we if any need to be removed, then we'll work with the agent at that point. But I'm 90% sure they they're fine to leave.
>> I feel like I need to move this up and down for Mike. Um the uh the cherry trees, you know, they some of them, you know, cherry trees always tend to be in a in a little bit of disrepair, I guess you could say. But um I think in this case if they were in sever if they were
severely damaged we can flush cut them and they regenerate immediately. Um you know putting on significant amount of growth but all of the native vegetation will remain. We won't be targeting any native vegetation on the bank. >> Okay. And can some of the uh I know you're removing a lot of trees. Can some
of them just be felled right there in place and left? >> We could leave some of the locust wood. Locust takes a long time to biodegrade. Um but I'm not concerned about locust spreading um more it's suckering from the root system. So if we wanted to
leave some of that debris on the ground, we could absolutely leave some of that debris on the ground on the bank >> for habitat value. >> Okay. Terrific. >> And um Okay. The grade of the driveway, I know you want to convert it to uh gravel. Is it
it's it's a pretty steep grade up to the garage. Do you think some of that's going to wash? We looked at that and and it it's about 5%. And that's about the cut off usually that that we recommend to go to to a
more durable surface. So I I think it it's going to be okay in that we're also providing um drainage for the um the new garage. Um, so actually I don't see it on the plan.
No, I >> I specified it. Um, but we'll add that to the plan. >> So that'll take um at least the roof runoff from the garage out of the equation for runoff.
>> And what what size uh stone you 3/4 inch or? Yeah, >> I I don't think we've gotten that far in the design other than it was either going to be crushed stone or a combination of stone and shell. >> Okay, let's see if we have anything
else. Uh, and the English ivy is going to be controlled. >> Yes. >> And um that's a big job itself. >> This is a big this is a big undertaking. The whole project here going to be at it for a while here, I think. Mhm.
>> Um and the and the uh souththeastern corner that's not going to be touched. >> The south out of the hundred there. >> Uh oh, it's out of the hundred. Okay, I see. Okay. Uh so will you even though
it's out of the hundred, will you uh continue that area, that corner? You will? >> Yes. Terrific. even better. >> Okay, that's it. Thank you. >> Go ahead. >> Yeah, just one thing. Uh Dave, uh it
doesn't matter. They can do it if they want, but it's not so much the erosion, but you know, going up if they especially if you're mixing shell or stone, they're going to get ruts, but hey, it's up to them if they want to just maintain it and rake in the ruts as
they go. And I guess it works. Okay. So, you're going to come back with a new plan because you have to put the drainage on, correct? >> Yep. >> Um you are will you mark on one of the
plans the downed pine that's south that our plan? Yeah. you'll be dealing with. Um, and that the cyprress will be transplanted. If you could make a note as to that. Um, and I I would like to recommend where
that note where you say, you know, what's being what trees are being removed. If you'd put a note as to why the pitch pines which are native are being removed would be terrific. Um, anything else? Anybody?
Yeah, they're going to they're going to leave some of the uh dead wood Yes. on the ground. Yeah. >> Yeah. If you just put a note to that the locust wood debris um some will be remaining on the ground. Um
anything else? Okay. So, you're June 25th at ZBA. July 8th's our first one after that. >> Sounds good. >> Okay. So we will continue this to July 8th.
>> I move that we continue 54 roll and drive to the meeting on July 8th, 2026. >> Second. >> Bob. >> I. >> Eric. >> Hi. >> Paul. >> Hi. >> Janet. >> I. And I say I. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Next please. Bradford.
>> Next up is a notice of intent for 42 Old Harbor Lane. Uh this is for Peter Harris. Map 16 I parcel 20-m2 D number SE 10-3768. Uh this was for a raisin reconstruct
guest house with patio and stairs um continued from March 11th and the applicant has requested a continuence to May 10th, 2026. I move that we continue 42 Old Harbor Lane to the meeting on June 10th, 2026.
>> Second. >> Bob. >> I. >> Eric. >> I. >> Paul. >> I. >> Janet. >> I. >> And I say I. >> Great. Next, please. >> Up next is a certificate of compliance for lot 59 Oldfield Bend, also known as
146 Oldfield Bend Road. Uh, this is for Mark Plansky. Map 14J, parcel 59, D number SCE10-588. Uh, this is construction for a single family dwelling, sewage disposal system, and timber garden wall. Uh, the
applicant has requested a continuence to June 10th, 2026. >> I move that we continue the COC for lot 59 Oldfield Blend Road to June 10th, 2026. >> Second, >> Bob. >> I, >> Eric, >> I
>> Janet. I >> and I say I. >> Next, please. >> Next is a certificate of compliance for 85 Cedar Street. Uh, this is for Charles and Mary Preuse. I apologize on your last name. Uh, map Oh my gosh. Map 13C,
parcel 14. Uh, CWP 19-136N and CWP 20-024A. Uh this is for removal of an existing deck, construction of a larger deck and construction of two additional two additions and expansion of their
existing patio. Um I reviewed this and I did not have any uh issues. I particularly like their medallions that they use to mark >> that was interesting >> plantings. I tripped over one so I know it's above grade.
>> Um but I would recommend issuing a COC. >> Thank you. Does anybody have any questions for the property? Uh, then we can have a motion, please. >> I move that we approve the certificate of compliance for 85 Cedar Street as written.
>> Second. >> Bob. >> I. >> Eric. >> I. >> Paul. >> I. >> Janet. >> I. >> And I say I. Next, please. >> Next is a review of the draft proposed land subject to coastal storm flowage regulations.
>> Thank you. No. >> Oh, do uh Eric wants a break. Should we take a five minute break? >> Sure. >> We'll take a five minute break, >> please. Okay, we are back. So, um we are on the
land subject coastal storm flowage regulation modifications. We This is our second hearing. Um we listen. >> Start over. >> Shoot. We're back. We're on land subject to coastal storm
flowage uh regula regulation modifications. Um it's the second reading of them. We listened to all of the comments that we received from various entities
and Janet and I got together and we incorporated what uh people had found. Um, and uh, I think at this point
if any of the commissioners have any questions, comments about anything that's been done, please feel free. Just point out to you as you're looking at it that we left in red provisions
that differ from what's in the existing regulations. And this time we added in blue things that we added since the first hearing. These are the things that were added in response to comments. Um so you'll see that that's the difference
between the colors there. We took out the reference to Phil since uh that goes against the building code and ZBA. Um, we added a few uh some de definition clarifications.
>> There were some great suggestions about adding things because again, we're really aiming to make these as clear and easy to apply as possible. So, we were really aiming for a lot of simplicity and took out a fair amount of jargon and
added some some common sense stuff. There are a few issues out there that are we haven't resolved and I think we need to talk about today. So, as everyone knows here, we we are long bothered by the issue of what you do
when a pre-existing structure um in the coastal flood plane is um redeveloped, is rebuilt, is renovated, blah blah blah, etc. like that. and and and um you know we have this we have this tradition even though it's not in
writing anywhere of grandfathering those pre-existing structures. So if it's in the it's it's far into the coastal flood plane, it still gets the protection of the original one. un less and this is where we're now we're taking what the um state building code has done and what
ZBA has long done and said if you are increasing that structure by more than 50% of X um then it has to be treated as a new as a new construction and has to um uh comply with all existing
regulations and so what that X is has been long a question um the the model uh regulation um suggested that we use assessed value 50% of assessed value because it's an easy to find number. The assessor has a number and everybody knows that's the
you know you don't have to argue about what it is. It is what it is. There's a great simplicity in that. Um but the state building code and what the department of environmental protection and its wisdom in their new regulations is doing is going with market value.
a little bit more difficult because without defining what that means, you're left in a position of potentially arguing with applicants about what that market value is. >> Um, but since
in order to to have uh alignment with all of the all of the requirements in town, we decided to go with market value. We also decided to leave it undefined because I think that you just open a can of worms if you try to define something like that. There are a number
of ways that when this happens um we can try to determine market value. You can always ask the assessor's office that regardless of what their assessed value is, they can do a market valuation for you. So that's an easy way of doing it.
I've also seen it done where the applicant proposes an expert, you know, a real estate expert that gives them a market value. We can get them expert to see if it's the same thing. You know, it's not as clean and simple obviously as assessed value, but um that's where
we landed. um if we find that it's not um if it's more trouble than it's worth to try to administer it then maybe in the next go round after we amend the bylaw we will go back to assessed value because it just removes that issue from
from the just consideration. So that's that's where that is at the moment. Um we left elevation requirements out altogether. Um the the state building code addresses elevation
requirements and in uh certain parts of the flood zone requires two or three feet above base flood elevation for rebuilding anything that is damaged in that flood zone. Um since they already require it, there's no reason for us to have our own separate requirement. So we
left what we left in throughout this is to remind people that um when you are u repairing or uh renovating in the flood plane you must comply with all applicable state building code requirements including elevation and that's just the way that that will be
dealt with. Um, one issue is um, this question about we left in here, we had in here that if your structure in the flood plane is damaged, you can rebuild it, but it or or you can renovate it even if it's not damaged in the same footprint. And and
then somebody commented, well, you can always make it smaller. We said, okay, that that makes sense. So, no larger than the existing footprint. And then someone said, well, what about if you move it landward? can't you move it further out of the flood plane so that
you're not tied to that exact footprint. Um, we have that um applying to the to the velocity zone at the moment that a structure that's in the velocity zone can and frankly should be moved further out of the velocity zone into the
moderate wave action zone. Um but we haven't gone any further than that in terms of other structures um in the moderate wave action zone or the minimum you know and whether they should be al they could be moved out. I think that we'll just have to deal with that on a case-by case basis as
applications come and I think our inclination would be to say well sure you can move it further out. Of course there's nothing that says you can't. So, we're just not going to go so far as to say you can because >> and with every regulation, there are
exceptions to the rule. We we look at each property individually. They have the ability to ask for variance at any time. So, while we are spelling things out, as we know,
nothing's etched in stone. You know, we work very hard with applicants to try and and have things work for them and within our regulations. So, you know, that's to be kept in mind as we go forward.
>> Yep. >> We tried to build flexibility, right? By having that variance available, >> that puts us in control of whether um we think that the the proposal um is sufficiently protective of the flood plane. Um the the one one other thing is
that um we do have in here that if a structure is uh damaged significantly twice by flood then it it cannot be rebuilt. Um before we uh do a final vote on this maybe after this this very this um
variation of this reference um we will send this to town council. >> Yes. for town council's opinion um to make sure that we're not inadvertently triggering a takings claim by saying you can't rebuild. Um don't I don't you know we'll see. So um that that question is
still out there. Um and if town council says it's fine, I think we're going to go with it because if you if it gets destroyed twice, I think that's kind of it. Um okay.
I think that that's pretty much it. And the plan is to have it go to town council next. Um and we would wait until the last meeting in June to um review this for a third time. But I know Carol,
would you like to speak? Carol Ridley's here and from Pleasant Bay Alliance and she has something that she'd like to read. Thank you for coming. >> My pleasure. Um, and thank you for all this great work. My name is Carol
Ridley, coordinator for the Pleasant Bay Alliance. And for those um, new to the alliance, it's the organization of the towns of Orleans, Cadam Haritch, and Brewster, formed about 20 some odd years ago to promote public access and healthy
resources in the Pleasant Bay area of critical environmental concern and watershed. Um we've been very pleased to be invited to work with the commission um with the town of Chadam, the Cape Cod Commission, um Woods Hole Crant and the uh Cape Cod
Cooperative Extension to promote consideration of similar regulations in our alliance communities. Um and recognizing that you're still working out some of the fine details of this, I was going to just read a letter uh from the the alliance in support of your
efforts. The Pleasant Bay Alliance supports the adoption of the proposed revisions to the Chattam Wetlands Protection Regulations. Section 2.10 land subject to coastal storm flow coastal flood plane. The coastal flood plane provides important functions that
benefit coastal ecology, property, and public safety. These wetland resources provide significant wildlife habitat and filter pollutants before reaching coastal waters. During extreme high tides and storms, the coastal flood plane serves to absorb flood waters and
buffer inland areas from flood and wave damage, thereby enhancing community resilience. This critical function is increasingly important as sea level rise and storms become more frequent and intense. Estimated sea level rise along with
storm activity has been made a coastal coastal resilience an urgent priority. Sea level rise in Pleasant Bay may rise 4 to 8 feet by 2100 with a 4ft increase in sea level by 2100. Close to 300 acres
or 71% of intertital resource areas could be lost based on current storm tide pathways mapped in Chadam Harwitch in Orleans. An average of 39 acres becomes inundated with every half foot increase in total water level along the
Pleasant Bay shoreline. The addition of 1 foot of flooding above current storm of record could result in an additional 78 acres of inundation throughout the Pleasant Bay communities. Moreover, there are 63 sites where public landings, public water supply assets,
public storm water management facilities or public wastewater facilities exist in low-lying areas adjacent to Pleasant Bay. And these assets are vulnerable to loss of use, operability, or access under certain flooding scenarios.
Adoption of climate resilient regulations within the coastal flood plane is a priority recommendation of the Pleasant Bay climate adaptation action plan to increase the resilience of the Pleasant Bay estuary along with public access and near for nearshore
infrastructure. Their proposed revisions to Chattam's wetlands protection regulations advance this important priority for Pleasant Bay and for other areas of the coastal flood plane in Chadam. Two other alliance towns, Haritch and Orleans, are currently
considering s uh similar regulatory changes that would apply townwide. Their proposed revisions would enhance protection of 1,837 parcels and 577 structures in Chadam
with an assessed value of $2.9 billion. The revisions recognize that the coastal flood plane includes distinct subzones defined by FEMA and provide performance standards suited to the characteristics of each subzone. The changes will
prevent costly and prevent potentially dangerous storm damage to properties and natural resources. The re revisions would not expand the geographic scope of the regulation nor alter any property owners flood insurance requirements. We applaud the commission's considerable
effort in developing the proposed revisions and urge the commission to adopt and implement these muchneeded protections. >> Thank you so much. >> We appreciate that support and that you're especially that you're here today and for all of your assistance through
the process. And as Carol said, this is not we're not doing this in a vacuum. We have Orleans and Harwitch are both taking this on as well. Brewster skylock going on. So they're um holding back for now, but this is something that the
whole area has identified as an issue. Um Heather, I see you're on and and Michelle and I don't know if either of you have anything you want to add at this point. >> Shannon's there, too. >> Oh, is Shannon there too?
>> Yep. >> Oh, >> yeah. I didn't even notice. It's not coming up. Oh, there it is. Yeah. So, if any of you have anything you'd like to add or comments, please do. >> Um, yeah, just a couple of things. Um,
thank you very much for having me. Heather Mroy, natural resource manager at the Cape Cod Commission, and together with Shannon and Michelle and others, um, we helped draft some of the model regulations that this this work is is, um, referencing, which is perfect. So,
we're very excited that you're you're taking this up. Um, in reading through your regulations, there were just a couple of things I thought I might highlight. Um, as a question slashconsideration, maybe the first one that, um, Janet just
touched on, um, was I think it's in section 4 D. um the suction that um provides for uh if a structure has sustained
substantial damage um multiple times, you might consider um sort of qualifying uh future uses that could be allowed on that um that site after the structure is
removed. That last sentence, um, no construction, many new structures. It, you could qualify that by saying no new nonwater dependent structures or rephrase it so that you are allowing water dependent structures. Um,
just a a thought. Um, and then this is either sort of a a question of grammar or it may be your intention. Um, but a little further up in this same
section um where you it's I guess it's essentially for AB through J. Um or a you say um you're basically saying no new construction or expansion of any
buildings or structures etc. Um I'm wondering if you want to insert new in front of sections B through I. um is
it one could read this to imply that >> um you know if there's an existing structure it's no longer allowed that's a legal question that I'm not a lawyer I don't want to get into it but um that might be something that um you
share with town council >> okay >> also depending on on your int your actual intention >> okay >> but other than that Um, I think this looks great. >> Thank you. Um, Michelle, Shannon, anything
at this point? >> Um, I'll just add so Shannon Holst, Flood Plane Specialist with Cape Cad Cooperative Extension and Wood Socialapic Institution, Crant. Apologize if there is background noise here where I am right now. Um, only thing to add to what Heather was saying about um, 4 D
with the two instances of substantial damage. Um, also potential for passive use of the property after um, any other structures have been removed. Um, it could have a picnic table or something. Um, just thinking about the definition
of structure. I know that was added. Um, but there could be something to clarify that it it could have a picnic table. People could potentially park there and still use the property. Um, just no new new houses is what you know what the the intention of that was. Um, and no, yeah,
just no no or sheds or anything like that. So, that could just be clarified a little bit and we could help with that. >> That I'm gonna say. So, thank you, Shannon. Somebody pointed out to us that years ago um when a certain uh street in Chattam um was washed into the harbor um
and somebody lost their house, they they they put up a fence in a shed and they put beach chairs in the shed and they would come and drive there and take their chairs out and sit and have a picnic and look at the water. Um and we said, you know, nice idea, no sheds. So,
um a picnic table by itself, uh we'll think about that. >> Yeah. But that's that was the basis of that. >> Yeah. Yeah. Great. But thank you. Anything else? >> No.
>> Okay. And Michelle, anything? >> No. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. I appreciate all of you being here and helping us through this. Um, commissioners at this point because you've heard from all of them. Do you have any questions or comments?
Okay. Uh, then I think what we will do is we will move to continue this for a third reading to June 24th. In the meantime, um Jen and I will talk about the
recommendations from today, which aren't very much, and then we can um ask that Bradford, you all, you know, ask Greg to send it to the um town attorney and uh that we need to hear from him
before June 24th. we'll do. >> Uh and then hopefully on June 24th, if everything's smooth, we can vote to uh activate these
maybe as of July 1st, uh to have a clean start with the new year, new fiscal year. All right. So, if we could have a motion to continue to June 24th, I'd appreciate it. I move that we continue the review of the draft
of proposed land subject to coastal flow storm flowage regulations to the meeting on June 10th 2026 >> 24th >> 24th excuse me >> second >> Bob >> I >> Eric >> I >> Paul >> I >> Janet
>> I and I say I >> All right the next please Bradford >> next up is a violation for 186 Kendrick Road uh this was for unpermitted vegetation clearing. Um, I believe we
have uh Craig Sullivan, >> if you want to come up here. >> Oh, sorry, not sharing my screen. Um, is it good or bad that I'm last? I don't know. >> No, we always that's we always deal with
any violations last. So, it's not because we wanted you to be last. It's >> Well, it's been an educational couple hours. Oh, sorry you had to sit through it all. >> That was interesting. Um, so this is our place. Obviously, um, we had a uh we we
apologized for the violation. Uh, unfortunately, it was inadvertent. We've never done it before. Uh, we won't be doing it again. And what happened was a miscommunication on a landscaping thing that we do. We we we have uh that's
basically all brush that you see that's that's cut away that we cut about 30 feet down every year to clear in front of the flag pole so we can sit on a bench that's there and just we have historically have had that opening for
uh for as long as it's you know we've been there and um and basically what got communicated to the landscaper who goes in because I don't want to get into that mess anymore. It's it's all invasive. It's a very difficult space. And um
somebody one of the workers cut all the way down to the to the Bach. And we didn't know it. We didn't ask for it. And um and what I'd like to think I mean I know there's a lot of ways it's going to grow in very quickly. Um if we do
remediation with with native plants and things like that, they're going to get choked out very quickly. we would have to clear the ground and unroot everything. Right now that was just brush cut and historically that grows in very quickly at our place and that's what we'd like to allow
happen and it won't be happening again and I don't know what to say. It got done so certainly was not our plan. It wasn't a midnight mission or anything like that but a miscommunication and we're sorry about it. >> Thank you. Commissioners, any questions,
comments? Yeah, >> go ahead, Eric. >> Um, yeah, I walked all through there. Um, there's nothing there's nothing special in there. Um, if you go back to the first picture, the one with a little
bench on it, it's it it's I mean that probably no one would have said anything, but it got wider unfortunately. Um, and then when you take the I call them silver leaves, the poppplers when you take them down, they you get a hundred sprouts and then they take over. Uh
yeah, I I at this point I I I I agree it's going to grow very quickly. Um and maybe assess it uh after a few years or something if if you wanted to have a
a window uh maybe come back and and have a plan, you know, where you could have a window. I don't think there's anything wrong with it. I mean, you know, problem is when you have a neighborhood and you look at the neighbors and then they have a meadow that's mowed down, you know,
you think, well, geez, why can't I look at the pond, too? You know, uh, you know, that's just what happens in life. >> Uh, I will say though, the setting of the property reminds me, you know, when I was a kid, as a matter of fact, that I think that property was there when I was a kid. >> Yeah.
>> Uh, it's a Cape Cod lawn. It's old school Chadam property. Uh, it's a really cool property. Um yeah. So I I I my opinion anyway is is I agree to just let it grow u back and and then
see what happens. >> I would like to say thank you because >> well I'm only >> and I don't have to bring up what you just brought up. >> I'm only one person out of the bunch. >> Yeah, I know. But we've been pretty good stewards of maintaining a habitat there. It's all it's all native grasses. We don't have a lawn. We don't have a
driveway. We don't have a patio or p or swimming pool or anything else. And uh and we really appreciate the habit. >> It was noted. So >> thank you. >> Thank you. >> Anybody else? >> I just have a question. So
um are you saying that that what is currently regrowing in that area where it had been the brush cutting had been done are invasive vegetation? >> There's >> is it all invasive? It's honeysuckle, poison ivy, sumac, choking vines on both
sides, everywhere coming in. >> Wild raspberry thick, it's so filled with thorns that um that you couldn't when it's when it's full up, you can't walk through it. >> Yeah, I walk through it. I mean, there's no not one day berry, not one
>> there's there's just there's just nothing there that's of any value. Um, maybe you let it grow for a few years and look at it and see what it's developed and if there's any, you know, but other than that, it's just I've walked all the way down to the pond.
>> Is there any way that there could be some invasive removal done? Since you've got so much va invasives, I would imagine you don't really want those invasives continuing to grow further into >> the invasives are on all sides
everywhere, especially at the lower part of the bog. And I'd have to bring in consultants and maps and stuff like that. If if you were planting natives, you'd have to clear I mean, you'd have to pull all that out. We could I mean, but
>> would be invasive removal. So, >> um, other people, anybody have any thoughts, questions? >> I mean, >> this is hard because usually when there's a violation, we ask for a plan
on how to uh fix the violation. And one way to fix it would be invasive removal. And I mean I I I get it. I have invasives.
I've worked hard at removing them by myself actually. >> Right. >> And I've actually been pretty pretty successful. Bradford, do you have any opinions, comments? Um, as Eric kind of mentioned it, there
is a lot of, you know, non-native stuff here. Um, I think from a protection of the resource and the stability, I >> given that it will grow back pretty dang
quickly. Um, I don't think there will be any kind of erosion issues. So, it more just comes down to the uh the sheer amount of um invasives. Um either side of his property also has the white popppler.
So, even if he does uh manage the white popppler, which I think might be the the biggest invasive in there, um there's still going to be ongoing encroachment. Um >> so, Anybody
else have any comments, Bob? >> I mean, I I didn't walk I didn't walk the site, so I I can't really speak to it, but um there aren't any there weren't any trees that were cut down. Um no native plants that were removed.
>> No. >> Um so I mean, what about putting a a like a one rail fence in front of the bench? uh just to protect the area so no one >> or something to mark so that nobody does
this again. >> Well, you said >> what we normally do is we normally we will normally take about 20 ft and there it's sort of plateaus like that. It goes down that way and we normally will cut back in the late fall or winter when
everything's down. We'll just cut right there so that we can use the bench. Otherwise, that's going to come out unless we start mowing it as a lawn and mow back into there, which we'd rather not do. >> So, >> but >> so we just the the you see the low brush >> there in the opening. That's that's what
we >> that's where we have them come in and cut to >> but only about 20 ft off the top there. So, then what happened you're saying is is that this person went all the way down to the bottom with >> Yes. Yes. And
>> and I do just want to note that I don't think this is a coastal bank. Um so 100 feet from the edge of the water would be partially down the the bank itself. >> Okay. >> Um just based on the the elevation right at the toe of the bank, I don't think it
meets that >> 4%. Looking at at what you've got. Yeah. All right. >> I'm trying to think how we prevent this from happening again. So his his annual mowing in the fall of the top 20 feet would not be within regulated.
>> That's correct. >> It was only when it went beyond that. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> That's a little harder to mark. >> Well, no. As long as during this point, as long as there's just, you know, it's not fully grown back, you could put up a
small split rail at that 20, you know, at that first plateau area. >> So that in future years, if somebody's cutting the top, which seems to be totally allowed, that would tell them not to go any further >> or something sign something like that,
you know, put a little sign on a post. >> Yeah. I I would recommend someday probably after it grows for a while, you're going to want to come in front of the board with with some type of a application to have a just a you know, a
a window there somehow. So, you know, not you don't need to go all the way down to the bottom of the bank to cut three feet off the ground, >> right? >> Uh because you're not, you know, you're not standing at the edge of the bank to look who cares, right? So the idea is to have a window of the waters.
>> So at the beginning of the bank maybe you know you would trim it you know like four feet and then stop in the you really don't have to do anything down below just to have a view of the water. Once upon a time there were trees there, but I could tell that was long time ago,
maybe 20, 30 years ago. Uh the maybe some trees were taken out. But I don't care about I mean that's that's >> I mean initially I I cut a a little trail on the side of the property down through all the brush and I helped maintain the path that went all the way around the bo. There's a bird watching
>> Oh, I know. I've been on that >> on the other side and people utilized that path before it was given to the conservation society. It was and it's you can't you can't even begin to walk around now. But that was that was maintained. >> That's because you stopped maintaining it.
>> Well, no. No one else No one else took on the >> No one else cared. >> Right. >> Oh, they didn't. But it was a kind of a cool walkway. >> Oh, it was great. >> Yeah. So, is there any way maybe a couple signs that say don't, you know,
something to prevent, you know, down where this area starts that shouldn't have been cut to prevent somebody from potentially doing it again? >> Um, I mean, we can we can put something up. You're saying 150 ft up from the
>> 100 >> 50 >> 100 >> 100 is what my letter said. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. 100. >> And, you know, we can make it at least that. And it'll probably be more I can. >> So if you could because this is a violation. So the next step is you have
to come back with a proposal and that's why I'm asking for something. So if you could just put together a proposal that says I'll put up a couple signs or a sign or whatever that says this and that
we are not going to cut it anymore. We're going to let it grow back. then we can accept that at another future meeting and then you're all set. >> Can we just come with a plan that has a
a fence or markers or whatever that are in there without signs? I mean, >> well, whatever side to mark it, whatever it can't get a piece of machinery past them works. >> Yeah. Yeah, I mean it was just it was
just hand there weren't any private brush. >> We're leaving it up to you >> come up with that a plan in quotes that says this is what we will do so this doesn't happen again and that we will not we will let this grow back.
>> Okay. >> And so when would you like to come back to do that? >> While I'm still alive, right? >> Yeah. Well, we have uh our next meeting is June 24th.
Um I don't want to rush you. So, if that doesn't work, we have July 8th and July 22nd and then we go into August. I mean, it's up to you what month you want to come back. >> Maybe I'll talk to Bradford about the
the how detailed you want something. I'd rather just do it myself and not get consultants in. No, I'm not trying to make you >> You can get a copy of the plot plan. Yeah, Bradford will work for you. I mean, it's just not not not You're making it harder than what we're >> Yeah, we're not we're not trying to keep it.
>> That's a good idea. Talk to So, Bradford, should we continue it to July? >> Why don't we continue it to July and then um that'll give us ample time to >> Should we do July 22nd since we have July 4th in that time and everything?
Yeah, please make it later because I'm I'm in Vermont and I'm >> Oh, okay. Well, I mean, if you prefer September whenever you can say >> I'd rather do Can we do it in the fall? I mean, can I do it >> later that way of the summer and get my family in and we can
>> figure that out and do it and maybe we can put it up. >> Can we? >> Yeah, we can. >> Yeah. You >> is if that's okay. >> So, we have September 9th and September 23rd. >> Oh, boy. And then we're into October. I mean, you name it, but we have to
continue it to something. >> Okay. >> You could always request a continuance. >> Okay. Um the plan will be um Yeah, fine. I'll work with I'll chat with him and we'll >> Should we do for September 9th and then if something comes up, you can ask that
we continue it. How about that? >> That sounds like a plan. >> That would be good. >> Okay. >> Can we have the second one in September? I know for a fact I won't be there September 9th. >> Sure. >> Yeah, >> that's uh 23rd. >> 23rd. >> Sure. >> I just have a quick question
opportunity. When was the house built? The actually was >> about 19 about 1930 was the cottage. It was there was there were no trees. You had a water view from our place. >> Most places pretty different. Pretty amazing. >> All right.
>> So, okay. So, we'll see the second meeting on September 23rd. We're going to have a motion now. >> Okay. >> All right. I move that we continue 186 Kendrick Road to the meeting on September 23rd, 2026 for a proposal.
>> Second. >> Bob. >> I. >> Eric. >> I. >> Paul. >> Hi, >> Janet. Hi. And I say I. So, we'll see you then. Great. And Bradford will work with you. >> Okay. Great. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. >> Next, Bradford. Next up are uh minutes
to be approved for April 8th, 2026. >> We have a quum. Okay. So, we don't have a quorum. >> Okay. >> Because Bob and I were out. >> So, and Elise isn't back until the 2nd
June meeting. >> Okay. >> So, we're going to have to continue it till the 2nd June meeting. >> Okay. >> Um >> need a motion to continue. >> Yes. So, we're going to have to continue it to June 24th. >> I move that we continue the approval of
April 8th, 2026 minutes to the meeting on June 24th, 2026. >> Second, >> Bob. >> Hi, >> Eric. >> Hi. >> Paul, >> hi. >> Janet, >> hi. >> And I say I. >> Okay, one more motion. >> I move that we adjourn the hearing.
>> Second. >> Bob, >> I. Eric, >> I >> Paul >> I >> Janet >> I >> and I say I >> So nothing. >> So we