heat hey Heat heat heat n good Afternoon this is a hearing of the Child Conservation Commission being held on April 23rd 2025 in accordance with the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act and the Town of Child Wetlands Protection bylaw and regulations my name
is Karen Latin 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 have been recognized by the chair when recognized
please identify yourself for the record if you're attending by phone you can mute and un mute by using star six if you're online and you're not a commissioner please keep your camera turned off unless you've been re recognized indicate that you wish to speak by using the raise hand feature so
we have a record of 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 have established we
have a quorum before we begin is there anyone who would like to make any announcements comments or future agenda items for anything other than the properties on the agenda today you may comment on those properties when it's being
heard i don't see any raised hands i will say I do have a comment um we seem to be getting a lot more applications that also have to go through ZBA and they haven't filed yet
and technically in our regulations it says that you should have applied to ZBA when you put in your application with us the reason this is important is that it delays our ability to act on the
property we have orders and we have to hold them until you've appeared before CPA and CBA takes a bit longer than we do to hear the uh um the properties so usually you
would be heard by us before ZBA and would know if there are any changes that we require so that's just a request to anyone listening or here all right and before we begin the agenda Katherine are there any announcements about any
requests for continuances today there are three requests for continuences notice of intent application at 98 Oyster Pond Furlong the applicant has requested a continuence to July 9 2025 notice of intent application at 186
Strong Island Road the applicant has requested a continuence to May 14 2025 notice of intent at 32 Bog Way the applicant has requested a continuence to July 9 2025 great thank you at this point Katherine
Ricks chair assistant conservation agent will now lead us through the agenda first we have a request for an order of conditions at 112 Independence Lane map 13B parcel DC5 for Scott and Eninsley Copeland Mass D SE 10
3727 construction of a barn and driveway expansion within the buffer zone to a bordering vegetated wetland how are you good david Clark uh Clark Engineering on behalf of the Copelands um I think I see Mike on there from Blue
Flex um I didn't have any issues with the order uh other than you got language in there about a um coastal engineering structure this is all inland wetlands um but uh I think Mike had a question regarding the uh demarcation of the
mitigation area um okay hi oh hello Mike Tannis Blue Flax Design um special order special condition number two you talk about a permanent permanently delineating the area and I
just wanted to clarify for our clients um in the past that could be a single rail split rail fence or steel edging both of those will will work yes okay that's all that's all I have thank you
okay um commissioners anything that you want to add or modify there's there I'm just looking at it there's um in in standard condition a preconditions number five agent will confirm that the trees
flagged for removal have all been approved for removal is that that's in red and bolded is that supposed to be in red and bolded to draw their attention to it i Yeah that's I noticed it was in red and I think it's to draw attention okay just wondering whether it was draft or
Yeah no deliberate okay nope that was deliberate anybody else bob I have something very very very small good uh the last sentence all in project and mitigation description all roof runoff i think
there's supposed to be a hyphen between run and off oh okay anything else that's it thank you anybody there is no All right then I think we can go to a
motion i move that we close the hearing on 112 Independence Lane and approve the order of conditions as revised second cheryl I Paul hi janet I Eric I Bob I
and I say I so you're all set thank you okay I got the next all right the next Catherine okay we have an request for amended order of conditions at 108 Beach Plum Road map 4D parcel 23 for R paul Deweiler Mass D SE
103674 demolish existing dwelling and cottage construct new dwelling and cottage amendment is to move the cottage to the east and reconfigure the driveway draft AOC david Clark again yes arc engineering uh I'd like to thank you for not reinventing the wheel and keeping it to
three pages that's the way it should be done um thank you but no issues good commissioners anybody nothing okay well that was good i think we can go to a motion please
i move that we approve the amended order of conditions for 108 Beach Plum Road second Bob I Eric I Elise I Janet I Paul Hi cheryl
I and I say I so you're all set on that one okay the next Katherine we have a field change request at 34 Scattery Road map 16I parcel 32-2 for 34 Scattery Row nominee trust mass
det 3669 raise existing house construct new house outside of jurisdiction with pool patio and walls modify existing land management plan field change request is to conduct vista management activities
how are you hi Matt Lottenberger here uh from Wilkinson Ecological Design for the Levies uh this is our second time presenting this uh view management plan to you we have removed the removal of the two trees as requested and modified
our mitigation to reflect the lesser number of trees coming out great thank you uh commissioners any questions comments i appreciate that you did listen so and that the homeowners
listened which is even more important um so am I seeing no comments i also appreciated the call outs the way you made the changes very very clear okay
then nothing i think we can go to a motion i move that we accept the field change request for 34 Scattery Road second okay bob I Eric I Elise I Janet I Paul Hi
cheryl I you're all set thank you thank you okay catherine the next okay we have a notice of intent application at 98 oyster pon furong map 13E parcel 29-11A for Steven A and Haley G Nadas
Mass D SE 10 3682 construction of a beach access catwalk the applicant has requested a continuence to July 9 2025 okay okay I need uh I move that we continue the
uh hearing on 98 Oyster Pond Furlong to July 9th 2025 second cheryl I paul I janet I elise I eric I bob I and I say I
so we're all set on that next one catherine we have a notice of intent application at 186 Strong Island Road map 13 M parcel 48 for David and Judith Dino Mass D SE 103724 construction of an 8 by8 swimming
pool and an expansion of existing patio seasonal rollout boardwalk seasonal access steps installation of mitigation plantings invasive plant management and native plant restoration the applicant has requested a continuence to May 14 2025
okay i move that we continue 186 Strong Island Road to May 14th 2025 second right cheryl I all I Elise I Eric I Bob I and I say I Okay Katherine the
next okay okay we have a notice of intent application at 784 Orleans Road map 11J parcel 6-6 for the town of Chadam Mass D 103729 enlargement of boat and trailer parking lot within land subject to
coastal storm flowage relocate historic communication tower within buffer zone to Coastal Bay how are you good uh David Clark and Clark Engineering on the behalf of the town of Chapman
um so this this project um involves two two different distinct uh um portions uh one is the the historic uh communications tower it is
dangerously close to the top of the bank at the moment and uh the town has been working with a uh to uh with a uh contractor to move the uh the tower uh slightly to the south about 40 ft I
think or 30 feet um in discussions with the um Maronei and uh the historic commission their desire is to have the tower in reasonably close proximity for
historic reasons to where it was so uh this moves it uh far enough away from the bank that it's going to be a very very long time before it's in jeopardy again and uh unfortunately uh it's a lot of significant trees between the the the
once the where it is now and where it's going to be moved to um even though it's going to be lifted by a crane and placed on its new foundation the crane can't lift it that high to get up and over the the trees uh so there's 11 trees that have to come out um and and a few of
them are are significant size oaks uh we did not provide a mitigation plan or a planting plan because um Department of Natural Resources has been working with uh a citizens group on the on the whole triangle piece and uh and they're
coordinating with them um as to where these replacement trees are going to go um but they will be put in uh it's just we don't have details because uh still being worked out with them um on on the second sheet uh I show the
details of the construction of the the footings for the or the foundations for the um tower um typical open uh excavation requires a significantly large footprint
um and so uh to minimize that we're proposing uh trench boxes around each footing to to keep the excavation as as uh tight as possible um all the material that's not needed for back fill will obviously be taken off the
site um found out today that this does need zoning approval um and so uh um Terry Whan I don't know if he's on I don't see I don't see him but he'll be
taking care of that so we'll have to continue um and the chair's point at the beginning of the meeting was is duly noted um I I I we did our best to to to flush out all the issues um before filing um
it didn't obviously work out that way um similarly with the second half of the project which is expansion of the the parking um found out yesterday through uh the zoning officer that uh that there's no provision in the bylaw to
allow that portion to go forward so we we're going to have to modify the plan um well there's three options um one there is an exemption in the bylaw for uh for town landings that would that if
this was officially part of the town landing it would be able in our opinion be able to go forward second would be um to modify it to to comply with uh the building commissioner's interpretation of the bylaw that there's no alteration
within the flood plane uh and three obviously it would be able to withdraw that portion um so we're going to need some time to to resolve that but we would like to still uh keep it active as part of this filing to get the commission's
feedback um uh knowing that if we do redesign it um or if if we we get the the favorable determination that it is part of the town landing um any any uh revisions that commission
might might want to see um based upon the existing design um there are some small trees along the edge of um some of those trees were planted um quite a few years ago as part of the negation when
this was first built i think was 2003 or 2004 um those would be temporarily removed and relocated somewhere on the on the property there are a number of uh locust trees on along that line um most
I think all of them are outside the the 100 foot buffer to the coastal bank and outside the flood plane so those aren't any trees that we're calling out as being required for mitigation uh so the basic premise of this is uh as I stated
in the the narrative um the parking spaces are a little bit too short uh they're finding uh that in the summertime the trucks and trailers that are parked there are are right on the edge of the gutter line of Ryder's
Cove Road and uh and it makes it difficult for um vehicles pulling out of those spots to to get turned and either back up to retrieve their boats or or or or leave the property so having
them just three feet back or four feet back um makes a big difference in in that maneuvering room within the writers Cove Road right away um not proposing to pave any of it um
the existing uh shoulder would be retrofitted with uh porous paving blocks not concrete blocks but uh the the grid that you infill with lom and um that would give enough structural support um for the back end of the trailers and
then that exist the additional six uh three feet would be just for the the tail end of the trailer to to have a little bit more room before they uh get into the bank or to the slope so no increase in imperous surfaces and
uh so uh I did provide the uh drainage calculations as required for non-residential projects um up until today or yesterday we we thought this didn't require any agency
review um but uh I'll be happy to answer any questions and and I'm sorry Greg Burman is also here uh from from upstairs to answer any questions uh thank you okay commissioners anybody
want to start anybody have questions comments i have a couple questions on the Is it not allowed wouldn't it be cheaper to stabilize the bank there's just hardly any room there
um the the I think it's less than 8 ft right now from the from the top of the bank to the Oh I thought maybe you'd start where isn't there like a little wooden fence down there or something there's a boat rack down there um I don't know if there's any I mean if you
started at the boat ramp worked up wouldn't that I don't know i would just think it would be a lot cheaper than moving the tower hi there Greg greg Burman your director of natural resources we did explore the idea of stabilizing the bank in that area um some of the negatives for that
would be uh pushing the erosion off to the sides or the fronting beach we didn't want to affect the inner title area we didn't want to affect the bank on either side that might erode um and you know overall moving back is
something that should be encouraged in areas where it can happen so you know this we the town likes to set a good precedent instead of putting a coastal engineering structure uh where we might be able to just you
know pull back and allow the natural processes to occur along that coastal bank for as long as possible the other question I had was the parking area um why can't they just back I mean this lawn lawn area that's like four feet why
can't they just back up the boat and trailer and it's only temporary on the lawn area wouldn't that be a lot less money for the taxpayers money well there is already a grass strip behind Yeah they just the asphalt burm and and they are taking advantage of that now oh they
are yep so they they I didn't see any tire tracks in it that's why I was wondering they they they try to back as far back as they can and and that that asphalt burm isn't really is not an impediment for them to get as so the back of the trails are are into the bank
now I was just wondering because that parking area is not a money generating area i mean it's not like you're charging if you were charging a toll to park there you know would generate a little money but that's that's all that's all I was thinking thanks
thank you anybody else bob go ahead i got a couple of questions uh the uh Yeah I was thinking the same way eric was thinking about uh trying to prevent uh the erosion along that coastal bank but I guess we got the
answer but um when we move that tower um it looks like you want to remove a pretty substantial uh oak uh like 20in oak is that necessary can you just move
the tower maybe uh north of it or I can't read the uh east of it east of the mean well if you move it a little bit I'm not sure of the I I looked at that too there would be a lot of limming i think it would be deformed by the time
they limmed one side of that oak tree you know which one I'm talking about David yeah oh yeah number six is the biggest one yeah um and the reason why I'm taking that out is because so much of the canopy has to come out to to to move the tower there it' be better off
just to take it out and plant something else plus it's going to continue it's going to continue to grow and and and might get into the tower in the future and then there's an osprey on top of the
tower so so the work would be done yes but uh Paul mentioned that to me today in my narrative i said there were no known uh uh nests and I failed to look up uh so uh I'm a little embarrassed by that uh but uh yeah we discussed that
this a little while ago and the work wouldn't be done till late fall okay and the locust trees they're invasive anyway so I mean it wouldn't be wouldn't be a
real harm to lose any of those you know okay that's all I have for now thank you i I just have one add thing there's an oak i mean there's a pine right on the edge uh make would make sense why you're in there to remove that pine there's a pine tree right on the edge of the the
erosion on the Oh right at the top of the bank oh yeah it's like the roots are almost showing probably would I would think it would make sense to add that pine in okay Janet I have a few questions this may
be a heretics's question but is this particular tower certified historic is there a reason that it has to be preserved the property is in the historic The property is but is this particular tower the structures are what are on the
national register having been on the board of the Maronei I know the answer to that it it it is indeed so it has to be preserved okay well just when push comes to when you're balancing environmental impact versus I guess you know if it So um next question is are
these locusts invasive varieties or not all locusts are invasive i understand we know is it OB says yes yeah they are the expert yes well I mean the Yeah they
tend to um regrow off their root systems and they All locusts do that because I was looking it up and it said you know black locusts are definitely on the list other varieties are hard to say they're black locust they are black locust they shoot up baby trees or you can see
everywhere yeah okay they are never mind they're bad boys um so can you explain to me how the the assuming you get you go forward with the parking expansion so there's that slight
burn do you so you excavate into that by a number of feet and then create a new um do you need a retaining wall then to hold we we're not proposing any retaining wall so the existing shoulder so to speak uh once you get past the the
asphalt burm right is it about a two uh 2% slope and it's about three to four feet wide varies we're just going to extend that another three or four feet that same grade into the bank so it requires cutting into the slope uh with close to the tower
um and regrade that at uh the slope to at 2:1 so we're we're trying to keep the excavation as minimal possible okay and regrading with the with the material that has been excavated or um or do you need to take more well we have to
stabilize it when I say regraving you have to stabilize the slope so they'll cut into the slope and and then they'll grade that slope to two to one um and then lman seed that and then at the surface level is where the the geob block pavers uh for half that width um
we're going to right and the other half is becomes the new slope the new bank there'll be three feet of geob block and three feet of grass okay because we're we're uh we're planning on that the the grass
section won't receive too much tire traffic but the geob block will be supporting because it's designed to receive support the trailers yeah and so um is I got interested um in the 60
pages of you know storm water calculations um is this what is triggering the requirement to do a storm water report on this project is it non-residential so any anything that's non-residential single family home supposed to have a storm water okay well
that makes sense so there's a reference there that this these geoblock pavers are going to mimic u the infiltration and and capture of storm water that is currently in the the grass system yes so how does that happen if it's if it's
partly blocks and partly um grass just as a in a sure um in an explanation that even I can understand i think the base is gravel i can Yeah there's gravel underneath so it's going to drain i can add a I can send a a cut
sheet of the of the manu from the manufacturer so basically it is a a plastic um honeycomb system that it's somewhat thinwalled uh and you infill with with top soil mhm and uh and
it's open on the bottom so it's connected to the gravel underneath okay so it's not concrete or it's not stone no okay and that plastic can can withstand the weight of the uh Yep oh yeah yeah I'd love to if you could send that at some point i'd like to learn
about that that's interesting um Okay um so I guess since uh since you have to go to ZBA anyway you have time to sort out the replacement trees and the species and
locations and you still have some mitigation to do because you've got whatever 800 and 840 square feet to mitigate y so we there's time to do that y which is easier than writing an order
saying it'll happen that was my question was about are the 33 trees that are required for replacement are they all going to go on this property it's it's over four acres so I think we
can find a spot and that's why we we didn't want to staff didn't want to uh put any show something that they're obligated to put in and it conflicts with what the citizens group's trying to do with the property um so we want to work with them and find appropriate
places for the trees but probably not where the towers are that would never hold 33 correct so and we also wouldn't have them near the top of the bank like that pine example we don't want to encourage anything with the fulcrum to destabilize
the bank yeah yes please don't okay um anybody else i just had one uh sure i couldn't help but notice that all the fishermen they have ladders that go down and the way it is now you know if
someone fell off it's a soft landing uh you put these in it's going to be a little bit of a harder landing if someone falls off the ladder um that's kind of what I what I noticed there all right on that note yeah um
we are going to have to continue so and you have to apply to ZPA when would you like to let's start with two months from now so that would put us one two three well
you could do June 25th or July 9th or July 9th sounds good july 9th okay then could we have a motion to please continue it
i move that we continue 784 Orleans Road to July 9th 2025 second okay bob I Eric I Elise I Janet I Paul I Cheryl I
and I say I thank you welcome okay Katherine the next we have notice of intent at 32 Bway map 6C parcel 217 for Sha and Alice Bartram Mass D SE 10
3728 the project proposes a tiered retaining wall on a slope above an existing dwelling and lawn the applicant has requested a continuence to July 9 2025 okay i move that we continue 32 Bway to July 9th 2025 second
okay cheryl I Paul hi janet I Eric hi bob I and I say I all right then next okay we have a certificate of compliance request at 915 Old Queen Anne Road map 7H parcel T4 for
Molly Logan Mass D SC 103462 view maintenance and invasive species control hello again David Clark Clark Engineering and Teresa Sprag from Blue Flax Design i'll let
Teresa do most of the talking because it was largely her project okay hi Teresa hi good afternoon everyone thanks David um Teresa Sprag with Blue Flex Design here on behalf of U molly Logan and her dad Michael Brown um who we were working
with on this project so this project dates back to 2021 when we received the original order of conditions and I believe at that time the only members who were on the commission that are still on the commission are um Janet and Bob um and so this project was basically
about managing an area that had been historically managed as a view corridor um the previous owners Michael Brown at the time was the new owner of the property previous owners had had previous um orders of conditions allowing them to manage the view corridor um but back at that time the
commission um was actually allowing them to manage the view corridor by topping the oak trees so over the intervening number of years the oak trees had been topped and topped and topped and um the property changed hands um Michael Brown
purchased the property asked us to take a look at what could be done to manage the Vista Corridor and it was clear to us that the um oak trees there were 32 in total were just in in very poor condition could not continue to be topped could not continue to be managed
and the way they had been managed previously and because of the way they had been managed previously there was no interior canopy there was no low canopy left so they couldn't even be properly pruned or brought back to healthy trees that would allow us to prune them most of them were suffering from fungal
diseases um so we came to the commission with a request to manage the property and manage the Vista Corridor by removing those damaged oak trees and I don't know if you have a copy of the um approved um land management and planting
plan but um in that area I have one I can share if you need um we did propose to remove it was a total of um 32 um damaged oak trees which were flagged in the field and we did meet with the commission on site on a very very cold
day um to look at those trees um and then there were a number of scrap oak trees that were in the area um that were actually in very good condition they hadn't been managed um so those were proposed to be left on their own um and then we were replanting um to get an
understory layer um established in this area where none previously existed because of the shading and the way the area had been previously managed so we planted the area out with a mix of amalia we added more scrub oak into the area we also planted some plethora sweet
fern um northern bush honeysuckle bay berry some fragrant sumac was planted along the edge of the proposed stairs um that were installed to allow safe access the bank was eroding um from the footpath that was going down the slope um as well as um arrowwood by Burnham
and then we planted or we plugged the area um with about 190 um parro Pennsylvania um Pennsylvania sedge um oak sedge um in this area so the planting was completed we've submitted our monitoring
reports the planting was completed I believe in 2022 we did the um initial work in the winter after we received the um order of conditions and um so the plants had been in the ground for three years i actually went out took a look at it this morning because I had not been
um on site in a while um and wanted to get a sense of how things were looking in there and things were actually looking very good of course things are slow to leaf out we've had a cold spring but everything was budding um everything was looking healthy the scrub oaks are doing very well um and are
returning you know beautifully in the area um the only thing I think has changed is that they were proposing a um storage box as well as a kayak rack and only a kayak rack has been installed um the stairs were installed as per the um
conditions in the order of conditions and this sides of the stairs were stabilized um I think as um Commissioner Delvecio had requested us to do add some additional planting to stabilize the sides of the stairs so that's just an overview of the project and and it's a
different kind of a project because we don't normally come before the commission asking to remove um the number of oak trees in this case it's hard to even characterize them as trees because they were as some of you may recall and we also have photos in our land management plan they were really stumps um with a little bit of growth
coming out of them um so we think long term the management of this area we think the management requirements to keep a Vista open are going to be very minimal if any at all um and in addition to that the commission did require that
um the uh Vista corridor area be marked in the field um and so in conjunction with David's office we he measured um surveyed the area we put the um steel rods um with some a safety cap orange
safety cap on them to mark the um the boundaries of the Vista corridor um so those are marked in the field for you to review thanks thank you okay commissioners does anybody have any questions comments just two comments um I do remember this
very clearly it was a it was a a real education to go out there in the field when we all went out to see it was the first time that we had really um encountered the long-term impacts of topping of trees um so it was that was
invaluable to see which is why we've have a a strict prohibition ever since that day um so and the second thing I just want to say is that um this is a this is a a poster child for how a view corridor should be designed and maintained
um so that nothing will need really to be cut or pruned again um and it's healthy and it's a good ecosystem and it it solves multiple problems all at once so thank you anyone else i had a quick question by looking at the map though it was answered so that's chain link fence is
just out of the jurisdiction yes okay it is yes the chain link fence and all the hardscaping beyond is just outside the 100 foot buffer okay um comm uh agents do you have any recommendations on this um I asked Teresa to do the overview um and I'm in
agreement the application's complete there was an ASB built required um there's one large pine tree down at the end of the walkway that maybe we can speak to the owner about removing it seems to be kind of on the beach but at this point everything's in order and uh
I'd recommend a U approval for a full SER okay could we have a motion please i move that we approve the certificate of compliance for 915 Old Queen Anne Road second okay
bob I eric i elise i janet i paul i cheryl i and I say I so that's been approved thank you very much for the thorough Thank you overview thanks okay Katherine at this point next
thing okay okay next up is a discussion on the modifications to the special regulations for tree replacement size requirements okay who would like to lead this lee Janet I will lead and I will turn to
Janet when I need her great brain um we work we work together to um basically simplify and clarify uh the layout of these regulations in particular in reference to trees i hope you guys all
read it and if you have any comments for changes to what we've done so far speak up um including suggestions for any kind of rework of the order of things and presentation um we think we really did a
good job clarifying the questions that we've had in the recent past about size of trees and what needs to be replaced and how we need to honor them and we eliminated I believe we really clearly
eliminated the ability to top trees um yeah we found a we found a stray sentence buried in um one of the mitigation provisions that said that on you know the the commission can approve topping of trees and we went ah what is
that doing there so that so we found that and said no no no no big strikeout on all of that so any feedback comments on improvements or commissioners any comments uh additions anything
right i have a few things good um under the definitions for native plants i wondered if we wanted to say something like straight native not nativar or cultivar or
whatever going back i I thought about that um that would been then required to define native R yeah so we have a list on the website of native plants that's a black and white test you know it's either on the list or it's not on the
list if it ain't on the list it's not considered native and you can make your case to add it to the list if you want but that makes it much easier but I think it reminded me that that we should occasionally revisit that list and and make sure it's up to date and that we've
got um because you know they are they are producing more and more cultivar native ours i I keep seeing them advertised do you want native plants we have native plants you're like I don't know about that one so um you can tell often by the name can't you yes bob if
it's got little quotes and italics it's it's a native R so if we add that link to the website list yes that's what that would be the action there okay and then um I thought maybe under landscape
uh I think it's maybe it's not I don't know what it's under oh it's coming from this page tree removal and cutting on B i thought maybe we should absolutely bold tree topping is prohibited so it stands out absolutely
um same in C clear cutting of entry topping for a view is prohibited yep um I didn't know if there's a percentage that we allow of pruning if
we wanted to say you know and I don't know what it would be but what what pruning is considered is it you know and I don't know how to define it but well it's it's def pruning is
defined um for reasons that don't generally have anything to do with a view which is right what pruning normally would be limited to you know for dead diseased weak uh safety reasons and stuff like that um and then we added this is from
the last time we did this the view pruning um thinning of branches or understory shrubs to establish the window to improve the Yeah that's why I asked the thinning what what maybe I and I don't know that we can i am not sure
we can yeah I think it's on a casebyase thing um under the tree removal standards I wondered if we wanted to say something about non-native we talk about invasive
but non-native because we've seen so many people come before us about saying they want to remove it because it's not native and if it's not a tree if it's not a tree we often you know we we we consider removal of invasive vegetation
to be a mitigation measure right you know so that's why I was asking about these locusts because it started me thinking about whether the replacement values should be the same for a native like a black oak as they would be for a
black locust doesn't seem right that that they both get the same replacement value but we're trying to keep this simple you know so that you can so that it's easily understandable yeah the only reason I asked was that we we've had people come before us saying they're
removing you know 30 oaks because they're not native right or something and they do still offer something right they're not nothing right yeah but they're not they're not as they're not
the same as natives well that's fun so we as you may remember when we first did this the the the tying it to the size of the tree is a is a standin for replacing the biomass but some biomasses are more valuable than others so the only thing I
could think of was is doing a an an an add and a subtract or something so that a plus one for a native tree so if you had to do a two to one you'd have to do three to one and a minus one for an invasive so you don't have to and then a
non-native is just I don't know in the I don't well I don't know how else to make it so that it's easily I didn't know if we wanted something like a sentence in there that said um that non-native trees can still offer
some benefits to the environment i don't know um you know because we've had so many people come before us wanting to remove non-natives uh saying "Well they're not native and that's why we're going to take them all out." Well so but we've been but we've
been they've been adhering to the replacement ratios right whether or not irregardless of whether they're native non-native or invasive right yeah i mean it seems as from a philosophical point of view better to distinguish and make you have to replace
more to replace the more valuable biomass and less for the but you know I don't know of any easy way of doing that that's uh doesn't doesn't end up with a big complicated spreadsheet kind of approach to things and my only other thing which I mentioned before the
meeting was I wondered whether we want trees to be its own section not it i mean I know it we've highlighted vegetation management landscape and tree removal standards i wondered if we
wanted a I know 5.02 which we probably already have but that's just tree removal standards so that it really stands out and people don't it doesn't get lost so I don't know if we want to and I'd
love to hear other commissioners chime in but um that was just a thought to make it I mean you put all this work in to make it really obvious that trees are separate from
mitigation and trees deserve their own section because we do now have that tree ordinance which precipitated us redoing this anyway um and it would sort of highlight the
importance of the trees just like mitigation is its own section but I do like that you pulled it out at least and made it a little more obvious the trees and not buried so yeah because we've been we've gotten
ourselves tangled up a couple times in that in the distinction between a mitigation requirement and a tree replacement requirement trying to trying to keep it clear so that was just a thought and I don't know how anybody what anybody else thinks or whether this
is more than enough which I think it is i just wonder if we want to make it so it's more obvious i mean we have a few more hearings on this some some trees that are invasive like the locust some poppplers if you cut them
down you don't get rid of the roots and they'll just shoot up multiple trees so maybe a mitigation on something like that would be that they would have to treat it they would have to treat new you know new saplings coming up for a period of time
true or have to remove the roots but sometimes the roots those roots can go 40 ft i know okay anybody else thoughts i got something small Karen oh good on landscape standards uh
E uh no pesticides fertilizers or shouldn't it read new permanent irrigation is permitted it should oh yeah right there in in E
it should say new which or we could say tempor only temporary irrigation is allowed but no no permanent no new permanent would work we could add the
temporary sentence we could add no temp only temporary irrigation that's an idea to add that what is it only temporary irrigation is allowed um for new plantings yeah for new plantings we're adding that to CO anyway aren't we
for three three years because we're having an issue with people removing the temporary for as long as the permit's allowed well the permit sometimes they don't come to us until 10 years later and they could have had temporary in there sort of
permanently i don't understand so maybe we want to add three years because that's what the order says is well but that assumes they have an order of conditions so well but we should put that in the orders that after three years temporary
irrigation has to be pulled i mean I think we've assumed we've implied that but you know maybe aren't we adding that to the COC though yeah it probably doesn't need to be in the regulation and if we get good about make you know enforcing it in orders and COC's that you got to take that take
those hoses out anybody have anything else i mean this is Wouldn't hurt to remind them twice this is the first hearing and we have what two more for this before we can vote it in um so you have time to
consider it and possibly come back with other comments questions thank you very much both of you it's Can I ask the the the landscapers and horiculturalists over there hey your question your question
yeah but yeah yeah yeah yeah but your your question is a good one it got me thinking i'm now sitting here thinking about when we when I we tell people to pull out invasive so that well usually they cut just cut down but trees gen invasive trees generally
and locusts in particular will respout poppplers and unpopular will oh yeah they call them silver leaves for short nickname but also poppplers they kind of look like an oak leaf they grow like crazy and uh they will sprout many times they'll sprout right out of stumps do
so but but um woody vegetation that's invasive won't do that so cutting that down and leaving the roots to decay is is sufficient well it all depends all depends on what kind except for except for notw weed of course because you know that's some some do and some you know most most stay down
but some just grow grow a lot of them just grow again yeah well that's why we have that condition in at least for mitigation areas that people have a perpetual requirement to check them and pull anything that's coming up that's
sprouting coming from across somewhere you know coming up but these trees are making me think you know cutting these trees down isn't necessarily going to solve the problem right yeah maybe we need to have something saying in perpetuity for trees invasive trees
that they have to be treated or or Yeah they have to treat the new We can do that shoots coming up for a while to make sure it's killed by the roots and everything so but even just make clear even even
with that they still have to replace them yes because there is still even if there's still some ecosystem benefits that but even invasive trees yes i think because there's still some there's still
biomass a tree is a tree whether it's an invasive tree or not i don't mean a u the other word you said a non-native i I I thought it would be a difference between invasive and non-native because don't we allow mitigation projects where they can get rid of invasive well that's
my that's that's where the question is coming from we require people to get rid of invasive so we don't require them to replace it but if it's an invasive tree maybe it should be replaced maybe one to one and
a non-native 2 one and a regular tree a native tree three to I don't know so devil's advocate how is that different than the invasive plants well it's we're talking about trees versus
it's a different it's a whole different entity but I'm thinking of the argument that was brought before us on trees a while ago i just we should really ma make sure it's the wording is clear yeah but a tree is a tree for habitat it's still a
tree whether it's a a locust which I or the silver ones which is what I have growing in my garden because we can't get rid of them um they're still trees birds still nest in them they still offer protection and habitat whether they're native birds don't care if they're I mean except for food they
don't necessarily care for those kind of things so a non-native and a native tree are equally as important in that regard i think they don't burn as well in your in your wood stove all the time but yeah you don't want to burn popular because that poppplers can be it's actually
poisonous is it really locust is good not the best firewood you can burn i don't know maybe we need to think about the I mean this is what's good about this is that it's starting us thinking about how we can really
continue to beef it up and well a lot of make our jobs easier going forward so if you double down on the replacements a lot of these properties are pretty small i mean where are they going to put all these trees you know maybe your tree fund yeah
um I don't know i guess it takes a little more thought does anybody who's online have any comments about what we've been discussing because I do see blue flags to call you
out i think Teresa got off okay so this is just trees this is nothing to do with standard trimming no I would like to get into that subject one of these times standard trimming vegetation management and and landscape is this first section is brings that in
so I think Karen's point is well taken maybe we should pull trees out of that and have vegetation and landscape management as a section tree removal as a section replacement and then the the general mitigation yeah only because as
you just said the the first section has a lot more to it than just trees and we're not really dealing with that right now we the what vegetation trimming we're not dealing with i would love to deal with that yeah well we're going to
deal with everything okay you've just volunteered you just volunteered eric did you realize that but um so look at SE subsection three is landscape standards so there's a I mean
this is old stuff that we've had in here for a long time we've never we haven't talked about or looked at so it probably could use this is the time to to look at it and say this either makes no sense right now no no before the next one before we bring one yeah this is the
right time so for the next round we'll pull the trees out pull the trees out separate section make all those other changes think about the ideas that have come out especially um the uh mitigation we were just talking about yeah yeah yeah and we'll take another crack at it
and I think that would allow after this section's been dealt the trees have been dealt with then we could go to the vegetation management and landscape standards and Eric maybe and Bob you too could get involved with that since
you're that's you have a lot of knowledge on it if you want but first we need to deal with the the first area that we decide to tackle so do we need a motion to continue it we
do but to continue the discussion so yeah continue we have to have May 14th to when may 7th or May 14th why don't we do May 14th that gives three weeks okay so I think that that
probably would be good and going forward it will be they'll put it into the May 14th meeting you know on teams and hearing on teams and everybody can see it there
rather than having to send it out each time so um but any I emailed you that I emailed it um any other comments or anything we can deal with uh at that meeting just like we did today we'll get
this read it over again and go forward so if we could have a motion to continue i move that we continue the discussion on modifications to the special rags for tree replacement to May 14th 2025
second okay bob I Eric I Elise hi Janet I Paul I Cheryl I and I say I okay the next Katherine please next we have minutes to approve for March
125 March 26 2025 April 2nd 2025 and April 9th 2025 okay now I forgot to look and make sure everybody was present at each one I wasing
Yeah thank you yeah I was absent April uh March 12th yes and so I think we're going to have to deal with them one by one is really where I'm coming from so March 12th let's do that one first
any modifications to that meet that minutes okay if we could have a motion i move that we approve the minutes for March 12th 2025
second okay cheryl I paul hi janet I elise i eric hi bob abstain and I say I okay um the March 26th
uh it looks like everybody was present so we can do that one uh everybody can go for it so let's have a motion does anybody have any modifications to it uh I got one small one here full of
small modifications today uh let's see wouldn't be the same uh 498 500 Shore Road the second paragraph last sentence um Matt is spelled Mat T not Mat i caught that in
the first part missed it there yeah he's through out with one oh representative there's another one he's not a He does spell Matthew with one T yeah that's why oh he does oh oh I looked that up because I wasn't sure matt with one key
okay so we crystal we should leave it alone leave it alone i And I made a correction to it earlier so I have to go back and uh All right okay anything else no but we were all here on the on April
9th as well oh true thank you Cheryl okay why don't we do April 9th as well any modifications comments to April 9th hang on hang on hang on i got to accept all changes stop to see April
9th okay I didn't see any modifications made um anybody okay um yeah there's a question the motion to vote Karen
represent make the motion oh who made the motion yeah I did write that i did i thought Yeah I think you did okay and there's no reason that she wouldn't have i just wanted to make sure that we had the right motions all right
okay um so we can have a um motion for those two i move that we approve the minutes for March 26 2025 and April 9th 2025
second bob I Eric I Elise I Janet I Paul I Cheryl I and I say I okay we just have April 2nd left any modifications comments questions april 2nd hang on
um I'm looking for mats that have just one T it looks like they do i thought I'd checked that previously but I wanted to make sure anybody no yeah there it is silence this one looks good janet think
it's good hang on i don't see anything I didn't change all right i am I move we accept the minutes for April 2nd 2025 second okay bob I Eric I Elise I Janet I all I
Cheryl abstain and I say I um okay catherine the next okay since it's the third meeting of the month we have our violation update i updated the commission with the sheets for the updated violations there's a positive movement on the violation
letters and notices that have been sent out we've had a lot of response and a lot of the the homeowners are working to fix the violations um as we did not advertise specific addresses we cannot discuss but if someone wants to discuss any future meetings please let Crystal
or me or Paul know and we can put it on the agenda and have it advertised yep all right and so we need Do we we don't have to have a motion for this it's just an update okay we have one
more motion and I move that we adjourn the meeting second cheryl I paul I janet I elise I eric I bob I and I say I thanks guys