heat heat heat heat good afternoon this just a sec this is a hearing of the CHAM Conservation Commission being held on April 9th 2025 in accordance with the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act
and the Town of Cham Wetlands Protection bylaw and regulations my name is Karen Latton and I serve as the chair today's hearing is being broadcast live on Exfinity channel 1072 and is being recorded for the ondemand archives available on the
town's website is being conducted in person by phone and by video conference the agenda instructions on how to attend and copies of documents for review are posted on the town's website 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're 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've been recognized indicate that you wish to speak by using the raised hand feature so we have a record of a quorum i will now ask each commissioner to indicate their presence vice Chair Elise Gordon present janet
Williams present cheryl Murvy present eric Hilbert present bob Delvecio present paul Johnson present and I'm here so we've established we have a quorum before we begin with the agenda are there any uh public comments or
requests for future agenda items i have one if no one else out there has one um I would like to put the uh revisions to the special regulations for tree replacement onto the agenda for April 23rd
great okay we will make sure that happens anybody else okay before we begin the agenda Katherine are there any announcements about any requests for continuences today there are no requests for continuances okay so at this point
Katherine Ricks CHAM's assistant conservation agent will now lead us through the agenda we'll start with the request for an order of conditions at 16 Windmill Lane map 16A parcel H3 for Jane Chandler Mass D SE
10-3723 elevate existing dwelling onto FEMA compliant foundation proposed building building addition and new title 5 subsurface sewage disposal system within land subject to coastal storm flowage how are you good uh David Clark Clark Engineering uh Lindsay Cook is
also online uh for the most part I don't have any issues with the order um you do have those standard conditions regarding a revetment um there's no coastal bank here it's a coastal dune and you can't have a revetment on a coastal dune in
Massachusetts so I don't know if if that's re is a is an issue or not and um that's about it okay it does say if they if it's applicable but I am sure we will get that out
suspenders we'll take it out all right anybody on the commission have any questions comments changes all right hold on i just noticed it when I was going down toward the end the
um the conditions from uh Natural Heritage are they in here twice yes ah okay do we want need them at the end if they're already in special they should probably just be in special
heritage you shorten this by a page if we take them out yes oh I just noticed that too sorry that's okay just shortened it to 16 pages anything else anybody have anything all right then i think we can go to a motion
i move that we close the hearing on 16 windmill windmill Lane and approve the order of conditions with revisions second okay cheryl I paul hi bennett hi elise hi eric hi bob i and I say I so
you're all set thank you i'm gonna stay for the next I figured you're just gonna stay there go ahead Catherine request for an order of conditions at parcel H13 Captain Null's way map 11 C parcel H13 for Minglewood
Homes Incorporated Mass D SE 10 3722 construction of a harbor access stairs over a coastal bank all right David for the record this one this one I don't see anything that
that's a red flag for us um however however I was out there yesterday with Tim Smith and uh and he wants to do some view pruning and I look back at the order for the house and there's no language in there about coming back to
the commission um so I don't know if how we deal with that with a a third filing for this property or or can we leave this open and uh Ollie he's got four or five pines
that he wants to limb the deadwood off and one oak think that he wants to take two or three branches off of so I don't know if that can be done on an administrative review or do we need to imagine so can I can I just Are they They're not in within the scope of this
the stairway no it's not they're sort of Yeah i just I just hate to spile a third nose intent yeah yeah yeah i think that can be by AR well we can vote on it i I think I think Well let's hear what Katherine says an AR cannot be within a
resource area so can we could you do an amendment to the to the original order yeah I guess yeah i mean all the deadwoods in the buffer zone so it's not in um that could be done by an AR yeah but
the but if anything's within the resource area yeah the oak tree the live oak with the with the branches is right at the top of the bank so that all right that's fine with me i just wanted some direction
okay Jen did you have anything to add yes hi for the record Jen Crawford um I actually have just something that I'd like clarified on um page 11E it's at the beginning of the order it's
um hold on one second i just want to make sure it's the right one it's number eight where we're talking about um you know your standard condition to permanently mark the edge of the mitigation area um in this particular case the mitigation that we proposed for the stairs is actually um
kind of an isolated island area within um the whole naturalized um buffer zone and at the top of the bank so I just wanted to ask about that because it doesn't really seem um it seems like it it it's just kind of
a silly thing to mark in the middle of the woods does that make sense it's it is it is on the bank into the woods not adjacent to any landscaped area just around the stairs yes is there any
reason anything that could any incursion that could happen there that I mean you'd have to go all the way through the 50oot buffer to get there you know what I mean right but you don't we wouldn't have any landscapers accessing this area for any purpose
uh for no um reasonable land other than taking care of the mitigation plants yeah i Right that's correct because it's not adjacent to a landscape area or a lawn area or anything like that yeah the whole point is that this is going over the area not disturbing anything right
disturb it to make it not this is this is I think an AR would work as long as it's not in the resource area it's No no no this is taking this out taking out this you were on the other part yeah I'm sorry yeah yeah removing the mark the uh
mitigation area yeah it would just be like it would be really weird to have a single rail split rail fence like for a 15 section in the middle i'd rather a fence not go there precious little area correct but I just wanted to make sure because sometimes
you know how this goes it's years later when it comes in for compliance and then there's confusion about it so I just wanted to bring it up because I um thought that maybe it was a um step for this particular uh order that could be Yes no I it's already out anything else
awesome uh no that's all I had okay thank you any commissioners bob I had something for special condition number six um app uh it should read applicant shall uh provide nourishment and install
native plants in the area of existing scapping okay okay thank you got that nothing else no anybody and we are ready for a motion please i move that we close the hearing on
Captain Null's way parcel H13 and approve the order of conditions as revised second okay i'm going to start this side i'm giving you a warning bob I Eric I Elise I Janet I Paul I
Cheryl approved i mean I say I Okay the next one please catherine request for an order of conditions at 27 Strong Island Road map 12M parcel 16-B19 for William C benjamin Mass D SE
10 3726 replacement of existing patios and walkways with drylaid Ashler blue and dry laid brick reconfigure patio steps and landscape improvements how are you good how are you all good um
I did receive just before the meeting your comments on the order so I will go through them one at a time so the commissioners can also hear um on page 11 C which is this is the
second 11C there seem to be two of them oh there are do we oh yeah second um you say does the prohibition on clearing
vegetation between April 1 and September one applied to the removal of the shrubs and trees of this project um you skipped ahead a number of the comments oh where's the number one number one oh I'm sorry correct the
state of the pear tree will be replaced with a native American holly and sweet bay magnolia so that was part of the revised plan right so we can change that
it's number three american holly it says American holly and a sweet bay magnolia will be planted in That's a tough That's a tough spot for a magnolia oh it's the the description is where you're you're having a problem with see yeah see we
pull the description right out from what you send yeah but then that was revised yes I understand but that's why that was there sweep Magnolia you had a north northeast wind through there and that magnolia is going to get
hammered it's actually pretty protected by a large spruce tree oh that's good yeah it is down in the findings it says an American holly and a sweet egg magnolia will be planted as replacement for one pear tree okay
then on 11D number two finding qualify that the roots of the removed beach plums will remain and add periodic pruning of the remaining beach plums is permitted it's permitted do you need
what's permitted under pruning is permitted under CWPR sections 4.01 01 PN6 PN EN 3 and 5.01 PN4 PN A
so it's it's more trimming than pruning right you're trimming them but it is permitted right with permission though with permission you have to have somebody has to give you permission usually it can be done by administrative
review by the agent it doesn't just blanch to go ahead and So could we change the periodic pruning of the remaining beach plums will be permitted with approval from the
conservation agent i I thought we were getting approval here as part of the not for pruning to go forward when you're whenever you're pruning and trimming you have to call the agent and just say "I'm gonna show I'm going to trim now." And you know they say "Okay."
They might say "Send a picture before and after or something simple." Okay all right where is number two special condition i think it's the in findings number two it's in
findings number two says to mitigate for the impacts for number two roots of the thirds of the removed beach plums will remain and allowed to decompose he would also like it to say where did I find it well that should
be a condition it's also in conditions that um he would just like to add that there can be pruning we'll make it special okay what
it already says that the roots will remain yeah I got that no it's a different I made I've made it a new No the remaining beach plums prior yeah I misunderstood okay okay we already number three that
you sent is identical to number two which is dealing with the pruning so we've got that in the findings because it was repeated in the findings so you've done that okay so it'll be repeated in the special yeah yeah so now
on page 11 I which I'm not sure what that is 11 I H standard conditions it's under the conditions for demolition construction site disturbance and drainage that section
it says does the prohibition on clearing vegetation between April 1 and September 1 apply to the removal of the shrubs and trees of this project i have to look at what it says did you say which number three
number three did not have time to print everything clearing of any vegetation scrub scrubbing of the work site in or within the 100 ft of the wetlands that is that pertains to well it is a
sight disturbance when they you take them out um yeah just cut them down immediately you know before the birds start nesting april 1st when are you thinking of doing this doing the yeah removal oh seems
like we're going to be delayed yet again because of the need for a special permit from the zoning board right oh so maybe we could see when you finally get that
approval what we're doing today is we're going through so it'll be ready for you but maybe we hold that one out as before we correct it you know change anything and see when it is that you get the approval and at that point you'll have
better idea of when you want to do this work how about that i It just because if we change it right now that's why Janet was asking when you wanted to do this work if if it were something we could approve today
you might say "I will have it done by April 30th." And we could say from May 1 through September 1 but since you don't know I have you filed i didn't see that it has been filed okay since you don't
know when you'll be heard it we're probably to June at this point with ZBA i think Yeah e easily maybe they seem to not be quite so far out right now but I
think we'll be talking about June so at that time we could visit that okay okay on page 11K number three qualify that non-native plants are
permitted with that in the outer aura if accompanied by native plants at a 1:3 ratio okay 11k number three number three currently says all plants
installed within the resource area including the aura shall be native species so that's inconsistent with the regulations as they now are right
we could change it to 75% of three installed within any resource area okay within the resource area and the no disturb or all plants in the within the
outer aura shall be I think we have to add within the NDZ then really you can just you don't have to plan all the dig within the NDZ you do
have to have 100% that's why We we're going to have to specify NDZ versus outer aurora okay we'll just say this content yeah we'll have to fix it
i'll fix the template after the meeting okay then we're almost done given that the project is limited to relatively minor landscaping changes is it necessary that I engage qualified consultant contractor approved by the
commission which is 11G number two and a site superintendent 11H number eight i think they could have the for this project we can change that
okay and then I'll go to the next because it's a question okay it's not a change um you're asking if we can issue the permit now on a conditional basis subject to receipt of the special permit at from
ZBA so that the appeal period can start to run in the meantime right we cannot Because in case anything changes then you would you can't do
anything till you have CBA's approval anyway and then if anything changed you'd have to come back to us and go through this process again and file an amended order so it adds actually to your work if anything happened to change
so as a rule we just do not issue ours we can send them a letter that says that this is approvable as presented to us and they will know that it's ready to go for us but we need their
approval so that's what we can do for that all right thank you okay so continue to Well I don't know when we continue it to because we don't have a
date for ZBA yet i don't have plans from my builder for the ZBA so uh yeah so maybe the first uh meeting in June yeah that's what I was going to say is that
is June 4th through the chair yes at this point I know ZBA is out till June 12th based on another project comment thank you so that would be June 25th is the earliest so So that definitely means
you'll have to wait on cutting the Yeah plum down you can't nothing can be done till that approval unfortunately so if we could have a motion to continue this for the order until June 25th i move
that we continue 27 Strong Island Road to June 25th 2025 for an order of conditions second cheryl I Paul I Janet I Elise I Eric Hi bob I and I say I sorry I forgot to ask
did any commissioners have any i mean we can bring them up at the next but anyway no yes thank you all right thank you i'm totally bollocks today um okay
Katherine the next please okay we have a field change request at 227 Vineyard Avenue map 11 C parcel D131 for an Azinaro Mass D SE 10 3471 garage edition and invasive species control this after the fact field
changes for an extension to an an existing low native New England field stone wall for stabilization of the garage foundation and to protect from erosion caused by wind extreme high tides and storm water runoff applicant requests to withdraw this request without prejudice the retaining wall and
the fill have been removed and the area has been resto restored to comply with the order of conditions as issued i move that we withdraw the request for a field change request for 227 Vineyard Avenue without prejudice amen i second
bob I Eric I Elise I Janet I Paul I Cheryl I and I say I sorry they had to go through all that we've continued this like 10 times so next one Katherine we have a notice
of intent at 30 Pine Lane map 13J parcel 6-G12B from Michael Tuya Lynch mass DP SE 103716 proposed screen porch sunroom and deck addition with the within the 50oot buffer zone to a fragmented coastal bank
and 100 foot buffer to a BVW invasive plant management native plant restoration lawn reduction mitigation plantings and kayak rack and for the record I will be recusing myself since these are friends of mine so obviously
so I I will be driving the bus okay hello Teresa hello thank you um good afternoon everyone theresa with Blue Flax Design here on behalf of Mike and Toya Lynch and Mr lynch is joining us online um before we start I do want to um point something out that just um came
to my attention right before as I was preparing for this hearing um so we received the updated site plans we changed our plans to match the updated site plan from the engineer um we did not receive an updated coverage calculations table from the engineer so if you look at our plan our plan still
has the same coverage calculations table on it the engineered plans that we submitted does have some updated um coverage calcs but they are not in your table format that you like so we did go ahead just before the hearing and put those calculations into a table format
we also broke them out similar to the way the engineer is showing them based on the bordering vegetated wetland and the buffer zones to that resource area as well as the fragmented coastal bank so with your permission um could we just pass these out i don't think this is new information it's just making the
information a little more clear in your format absolutely so just as a review um because it's been quite a while since we were last um at this hearing um this project proposes to um remove an existing um deck to the
north of the house to add um or expand a deck that's existing on the east side of the house and to expand an existing ing deck just to the south of that and um and build a sun room in the footprint of that deck with a minor expansion um with
those proposed um increases in structure we are proposing just over 18,000 square feet of mitigation in the form of invasive species management and restoration and um in the form of removing um non-native cool season
velvet grass from an existing meadow-like area and actually transitioning that into a native um grass and wildflower meadow we're proposing to remove all of the lawn um on the um east side of the house and plant that all out with native
vegetation um and we are proposing to remove some non-native trees as well as a couple of hazard um pitch pines that will be replanted um at um greater than 2:1 so um the changes that have been made and the updates to the plan include um
the previously proposed deck on the north side of the house has been removed um and now they are proposing a drylaid patio in that area um they have decreased the overall size of the proposed deck expansion on
the east and the proposed size of and and decrease the size of the proposed sun room just to the south of that i should have pointed out at the beginning um that we have the resource areas on this site include a ve bordering vegetated wetland and then we do have a
coastal bank which is fragmented because it is based on um the flood elevation and the topography of this site so the um coastal bank actually runs to on the south a little bit lower and then there is an existing retaining wall um to the
west on the north side of the property and so there is no coastal bank area and then it jumps up just along that because of the changes in topography and the steepness of that area where that retaining wall is located um we did discuss at the last hearing the
possibility of removing that retaining wall but when we looked back and did some further analysis on that we do think that the amount of disturbance required to remove that retaining wall would be greater than the benefit we would gain from removing that retaining wall so we are not proposing to remove
the retaining wall at this time um there is an existing concrete pad at the walkout which is underneath the deck that is now proposed to be transitioned into the sun room we are proposing to remove that concrete pad um from that area because it will continue to be
under the deck um in that area where it's currently located under the deck we would be proposing to use gravel or pee just to allow for water infiltration in that area and then the portion of the deck that would be expanded would be planted out with the Pennsylvania sedge and the crinkle hair grass that's
proposed to be planted um throughout um what we're calling sort of the walkway areas we are proposing to maintain access um to Frostfish Creek with a mode path through the meadow area um and we are proposing a kayak rack um down along
that just outside of the bordering vegetated wetland to allow access for paddle boards um or kayaks um the other thing that we've done is we have not decreased the number of trees but we have shifted the locations of some of the trees based on the abuter's request
that we not block any of the existing views um this is quite a heavily canopied site um so I think that um rather than having a row of cedar trees which is what we were proposing along the southern property line we've opened that up a little bit so that they may
gain some views to the river um across the meadow area of this property so with that I'm happy to answer any questions um we have an overall um decrease um again we've got a little bit one of the things that I
noted on the engineers's plan is with the removal of the concrete pad he um he included the complete removal of the concrete pad but because we're proposing to keep some gravel or peace in that area we did not include that in our coverage calcs so while we will be
changing that from an imper imperous surface to a permeable surface it's still structure um as far as it's not a vegetated area so we did not include that in our coverage calculations table that I just handed out but did want to make clear that we will be removing the
impervious material and using permeable material um underneath that decking so I'm happy to answer any questions about the overall plan and the changes that have been made i have a quick one okay rinse station is not marked on the new
plan it's on your plan but it's not named and it's not on the as far as I can tell it's not on the engineering plan i believe the rinse station is located um on the um just to the north of the um
where it says lot 46 yeah it's not it's on yours but it's not named okay and it's not on the engineers okay that's something we can definitely add um and make sure that that is that that is shown on the engineer site plan and that
it's located thank you for pointing that out i did not realize that thanks thank you Cheryl i had that too Paul uh on the coverage calculation table put your put your microphone on sorry on the
coverage calculation table that you just handed us yes the area of structures yes uh the proposed versus the existing I calculate as 370 not 327
um for which one so we've tried to break it down into BW and BBW okay so you've got um Oh I'm sorry so the existing So there's an increase it says 327 but I get 370
okay the 541 and the 171 yes okay i think Mike who's on this um is going to be checking his math right now sorry I did not do the math on this so um but I will check that and we can we can correct that my apologies is that it Paul yes
okay quick question go for it so with this with this new C uh coverage calculation what about the one that's on the revised planting plan is that coming off that's going to come off okay it needs to be updated i And we have this
situation again where we've got this fragmented coastal bank and the BVW and the 50 foot and 100 foot buffer zones overlapping so for it to fit into the format that's provided with the Cadam NOI checklist we've had to break it down
into two different because the right now the proposed patio is outside of the buffer zone of the 100 foot the outer aura to the BVW but because that fragmented coastal bank jumps up because of that artificial retaining while it puts it within the 50- foot buffer of
that fragmented coastal bank right right i sympathize with with the complexity of calculating all these yeah and just making sure that it's clear in the in the format that um Yes no I just want to make sure that the the tables that are going to be stamped onto the approved
plans are consistent will be what we just handed out to you yes got it okay thank you y that it Well I was writing notes in the very beginning and I missed the explanation about the railroad tie wall so I believe at the beginning at
the first hearing there was um a question of whether or not that tie that that retaining wall could be removed and we did say we would take a look at that but in in looking at it further it seems that the amount of disturbance required to remove that retaining wall would be greater than the benefit that we would
gain for that because there is existing native vegetation in there that would have to be dug out and removed and so I think that the retaining wall itself is not um a barrier to wildlife it's not um providing or or it's not preventing um
any it's not it's not doing anything as far as the land's ability to be a vertical buffer to flood water um so we felt that leaving the retaining wall would be less disturbance and then just removing the invasive vegetation and then replanting that entire top of that
retaining wall as well as restoring any areas below it that need to be restored okay got it that makes sense thank you yep um um when I was on the commission from 2004 to 7 and on the con commission now
um I don't think I've ever seen a encroachment of construction in the no disturb zone um and to be mitigated by plants um from from all I've ever seen is like if there was an old boardwalk heading
down to the water if there was a couple old sheds in in the woods that could be mitigated and torn down and the square footage uh traded for encroachment of a construction of a building in the no disturb zone uh you know that's
acceptable the town had voted the vote the taxpayers of this town uh voted that to have a no disturb zone and it's I I don't like to say NDZ a lot of people don't even know what it means it's called no disturb zone for a reason
um that's the only reason I mean you you said you were going to have an engineer to look at the wall to see if it can be done whether it's structural damage to the bank and whether it's a inconvenience it would be mitigation for uh non-pervious to trade for
encroachment in the no disturb zone um I've never seen it i every time we've ever done plans the anything in the no anything in the no disturb zone has to stay within the same footprint uh it can't get any you know any any larger we
don't care if it's two stories three stories as far as conservation's concerned but the footprint should not be any greater than the previous footprint whenever they tear houses down old houses put it back um I I I just
don't agree with it i um I I you know I mean take it to a vote you guys can go ahead and let it through but I I just think you start you know allowing construction and additions and in the no disturb zone you know you you're sending the wrong message for future applicants
that are going to come forward thanks so I guess the the my there's two things that I have to say that again we're dealing with two different we're two two different resource areas we're dealing with the bordering vegetated wetland which we are outside of the no disturb
zone for that particular resource area then we're dealing with this fragmented coastal bank which does put us in within the NDZ because it jumps up to this artificial um retaining wall um that was constructed probably when the house was constructed to provide some level um
area outside the back of the house so that's one thing and then we did apply for a variance um with this and we did provide um an alternatives analysis and um and we are providing mitigation at um
18,000 square feet to 657 square ft of increase in structure that includes removing all existing lawn um from within the area as well as all of the invasive vegetation and then transferring this non-native grass land into a um native grass and wildflower
meadow um so we do believe that we are significantly improving and protecting the resource area with what we're proposing in mitigation so that it meets the um variance criteria as far as um a public benefit and protection of the resource area better protecting the
resource area um we did look at again at feasible alternatives there is already existing structure within that 50-foot buffer zone to the fragmented coastal bank um likely when this house was built um because the FEMA elevations changed
back in 2014 this would not have been within the um within the buffer zone to this fragmented coastal bank this is based on the flood elevations again so um I just think it's difficult when we're trying to weigh this there's I I
do not see that this um pro project will adversely affect this abilities uh this bank's ability to um act as a vertical buffer to flood waters um the flood elevation on this site is um I'm sorry elevation
uh sorry the engineers plan's bigger than ours um the flood zone on this site is lower down much lower down on the bank um located at um the fragmented coastal bank at elevation 11 and we've got an AE zone 11 not again not a
velocity zone we've got an AE flood zone and then behind that we have a flood we have an X zone so less than 1% chance of any area flooding above that so this air this is not being proposed within any um land sub to coastal storm flowage um
It's being proposed well outside of the 50-foot buffer zone to the bordering vegetated wetland there is already ex existing structure they are proposing to expand this existing structure somewhat but they're willing to mitigate this um at you know at the at the ratio that
they're proposing to mitigate it at um which I think is a significant improvement to the resource area in um our land management plan we've included on page four some photographs of the site um you can see the the size of the bittersweet so the level that this in
invasive vegetation is getting to I think there is a great opportunity to restore this with a completely native um plant community and and um better protect the coastal bank than it's currently than its current conditions i have a couple Teresa okay do you have
any idea when it's going to go to ZBA um Mr lynch may be able to answer that um I am not sure that this has been filed with ZBA yet but Mike uh Lynch if you know what the ZBA filing date is would you share that with us please
um Terry Teresa I don't know okay um I just got back from Spain yesterday oh sorry haven't been in touch with Jamie um as of right now I don't know okay so it likely will not be before the June 12th um hearing likely after that okay
yep welcome home Michael um Okay a couple more things um can we note on the plan the mopath it's there but it's not I don't think it's indicated oh is it lab we need it labeled we will label that yes thank you
um access to the site do we know where that is going to occur yes so we right now we can access both from the north and the south on this site so and in order to do this work we will not any of the um vegetation invasive vegetation
that we're removing on the bank itself will be done by hand and then winched into the area so that would be the area below the retaining wall so we would set up um a small machine with a winch cut and treat the invasive vegetation winch it up out of the area for the um area
where the meadow is going to be restored it is not quite as steep in that area so we will be able to have machine access the idea would be to use a sod cutter to remove that velvet grass and try and get as much of that root material without disturbing the soil to the extent possible and then allowing us to recede
that area um and then seed uh I'm sorry cover with chopstar or blanket um depending on um the time of year that we're doing the work great yep thank you um the two cherry trees in the front yard yes they're such healthy trees they
are and um they're they're quite large um and the only reason that they're proposed for removal is because that canopy is spreading it's almost touching the house it doesn't allow any light penetration to the house and they're having issues with um mold and um uh
moss growing on the front of the house and on the roof so they're just trying to open that up to get some air circulation um in that area so pruning wouldn't make any sense i don't think so um it was really their desire to remove those trees i'm sure if the commission felt very strongly that they would like
to keep those trees um we could look at pruning them i I did not give them a close look at for pruning options okay uh let's see what else were we Did we talk at one point about removing the double stairs we did talk about removing
the double stairs and I did speak to the property owners about that and they would like to maintain those double stairs because it gives them access to the north side of the house from the deck and then as well as giving them access down to allow their um to allow them access to their footpath to the
creek um so we did speak to them about that and they did request to keep the double stairs if possible okay um Bob do you have anything uh a couple of things um yeah I was going to mention the stairs too Teresa
um I think it may be overkill i mean I think uh you have two two ways to access that deck so okay i'd like to see one of them gone myself if that's possible mhm
um on the uh on the plant schedule yes dwarf Fargilla um it should be uh it should be violet or purple on the on the uh plan you're right and it looks like it's brown like a light brown i think
that's the way it's printing so I will make sure that I think it showed like that on the screen but it's printing in that color so I'll make sure that it prints properly and also oakleaf hydrangeanger uh corsophogia yes uh should be yellow and it's dark brown I
believe on the uh y on the plan okay i'll make sure that's corrected thank you and the uh path leading down to the water yes um what about demarcating that path
so we tried to plant some shrubs in clusters around that path um you can see to um to kind of direct people in that area we could we could thicken that shrub planting up a little bit more to I don't think they would like to do fencing i think they'd prefer to use
vegetation if possible so we could we could absolutely thicken that shrub planting up so that we can continue to mow around it just to keep the invasive vegetation out of there but still very clearly mark where the path is going okay that makes sense thank you y that's all I had uh Teresa one more thing on
the access yes um we're going to need a letter from the the abuter I think on that one if there's any um I don't think we should not be trespassing or off of this property at all yeah so we're we're entirely on the Lynch's property the Abu
to the south um they have an easement over that area um on the east side of the property they don't own that that actually belongs to the property that's out on um Route 28 okay okay um but we will not be accessing or need to access that area at all
anything else i just had a one one quick question y did you work with the butter on placing those cedars well we we designed this so that they would have that view from their um patio and their outdoor living space so we moved and shifted so
previously we had the cedars running all the way down the southern property line and we've kept them we've just shipped them and moved them into different locations so that we opened up that spot the area to the north of that is is really quite heavily vegetated so we're thinking that that will gain them you
know potentially a little um a little access over to Frostfish Creek my understanding is they do have an easement over the property directly in front of their house so they do have a full open water view um so this will allow them a little peekaboo up the creek but you didn't uh um gather any
feedback from them at all we haven't heard from them since the original hearing and they did have an opportunity to see this plan okay thank you great anything else no
so should we work toward an order of con uh conditions timed with ZBA well I would like to I would like to vote on it and get voted out of this so I have a good conscience so if you guys want to vote on I would like to vote on this because
I would vote no on this project any any encroachment whatsoever in a no disturb zone unless there's uh something to trade there's nothing here to trade if you remove the if you remove the restoration restoration is a great bargain it works good for the applicant works good for conservation it's a
win-win they get a view of the resource and we get and we get indigenous uh uh plantings so if you remove the restoration and then you get down to the mitigation and that's really what you have to get down to and I I just I've never seen it before i've never seen a
uh mitigating in a no disturb zone unless you got something hard to mitigate mitigate with that i'd like to respond to that because that's been an issue for a long time that we've struggled with um you know trying to say we want we want hardscape to change
hardscape so if you're going to put hardscape in the NDC you have to take hardcape out somewhere else in order to be because otherwise vegetation is not permanent hardscape is and so um that became that ended up being not particularly feasible because in a lot
of situations there's no hardcape to take out and so that led us to changing our orders of condition to require that um mitigation plantings are per permanent and this is an NDZ encroachment in the NDZ on on structures
so that and it stays on their title forever in perpetuity um that they have to they have a obligation to you know take care of it to remove invasives that come in there and to ensure that the area survives that's as close as you can get to a per to permanent and making
feeling that trade is a is at least a decent I've never I've never seen in front of us so far an encroaching building in in a new new construction and no disturb zone i don't know i'm I'm I'm struggling to think of it but I do I do think that
pairing it back as much as as as possible taking out one of the excess stairs maybe pulling that proposed lower deck back a little bit more to uh I do think we have one more one more round of revisions but since ZBA is not pressing we have the time to see if you can make
a a few more changes we've got 519 square feet of of of incursion into the NDZ which is a significant number now I grant you that you've got 18,000 square ft of mitigation yes which is great but but to Eric's point you know 519 feet of
structure in the NDZ is not something to approve lightly okay so we'll go for a a straight continuance and one more question Teresa work protocols we can provide a work protocol please thank you okay um with that then
I would like to request a continuence um I I probably need a couple of weeks just to write the um work protocol and then speak with the clients make these changes make the revisions get the engineer to make the revisions so um I'm not sure what your next hearing dates are off the top of my head we have April
23rd May 7th May 14th could we continue to May 7th you may thank you okay um I I move that we uh continue the hearing on 30 Pine Lane to May the 7th second
okay i Eric hi Elise i Janet i Paul i Carol i and I say I you can't vote i can't i abstain
i'm so used to saying I yes thank you very much for your time today thanks okay thank you okay Katherine okay next is the vote to appoint Karen Latin as representative to community preservation committee
so Karen has been serving very well representing us on on this committee uh for the past three years and she has indicated that she is willing to continue so I am going to for which we're incredibly grateful yes
thank you Karen thank you unless unless there's a question or an objection from anybody on the commission absolutely no objection i will make a motion that we appoint Karen Latin as the Conservation Commission's representative to the Community Preservation Committee second
oh I have to do it so we'll take the vote cheryl I paul i janet I i say I eric i and Bob and a resounding I and I abstain resounding now and I think we only have
one more one more motion motion to the meeting and I vote that we adjourn the meeting second cheryl I Paul I Janet I Elise I Eric I Bob I
and I say I thank you everyone