Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Was it the other Good afternoon. This is a hearing of the Cham Conservation Commission being held
on June 25th, 2025 in accordance with the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act in the Town of Chadam 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 on demand archives available on the town's website. It 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 you're 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've been recognized. Indicate that you wish 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 Elise Gordon, present. Janet Williams, present. Cheryl Missouri is not here. Eric Hilbert, present. Bob Delvecio present. Paul Johnson present.
And I am here. So we have a quorum. So is there anyone who has any announcements, comments or future agenda items for anything other than the properties on the agenda today? I'm not seeing that anybody does. I'm
not seeing any raised hands. So we will continue. Before we begin the agenda, Paul, are there any announcements for any requests for continuances today? Good afternoon, Madam Chair and commissioners. There are three continuences. The first one is 21 27
Strong Island Road. Um the applicants requested a continuence to July 9th, 2025. That was on for an order. 141 Apps Apps Gaming Run is going to be continued at the applicant's request to August 27th.
and 20 L Street will be continued to July 23rd. Okay, thank you. At this point, Paul White Men Chadam's conservation agent will lead us through the agenda. All right, I'll just read this one again. First on the agenda is a
requested order of conditions. 27 Strong Island Road, William C. Benjamin map 12M parcel 16-B19 DP number SC SE 10 3726 replacement of existing patios and walkways with drylaid uh ashler blue stone and drylaid
brick reconfigured patio steps and landscape improvements uh it was continued from March 25th excuse me March 26 2025 and the applicants requested a continuence to July 9th to 2025. All right, I guess we can have a motion,
please. I move that we continue 27 Strong Island Road to July 9th, 2025. Second. Okay. Bob, I. Eric, I Janet, I. Paul, I and I say I. Okay. The next Next
on the agenda, Madam Chair, is a request for an order of conditions. The address is 734 Foxhill Road, Willis Barton Row, Map 12M, parcel W1, D number SE 103731. Site redevelopment and it was continued
from May 14th, 2024 and June 11th, 225. Um, the applicants withdrawn the application because of the ZBA uh issue, but I believe we need to continue this to a date certain. Is there anyone here representing this applicant?
Uh, it's from Tai and Bond. So, is there anyone otherwise we will pick a date and it I would think that we probably want to continue it pretty much to September at this point. Um,
because they have to reapply, figure things out and reapply with ZBA. So since I am not seeing that anybody's on um let's continue it to September 10th which is our first um September. How far
out is ZBA at this point? I I think probably September but since nobody's on let's do it to I mean if they have something ready at that point to present to us they can and you know have the ZBA
scheduled. So, we'll be able to move forward with, you know, at least hearing something if if they've got it. I think September 10th will I think be enough. Okay. I move we continue 734 Foxhill Road to September
10th, 2025. Second. Okay. Paul, I Janet I, Elise, I. Eric, hi. Bob, I. And I say I. So, next, please. Next on the agenda is a submitted field change request. The address is 859 Main Street. The owner is
859 Main Street Cadam LLC. Map 13E, parcel 4, DP number SC 103656. A redevelopment of an existing commercial lot. The field change request is to relocate the refuge containment exlosure to a location within 100 foot
buffer zone. Thank you. Is there anyone here for this? Didn't I see Everybody's gone to the Everybody's gone to the beach, I guess. But didn't I see
David here earlier? Yeah, he was. Yeah. H maybe move it to the bottom. He walked in at one point. Yeah, he did. Um I was talking with him. So, yeah. just uh table it. I think we will have
to because nobody's here. So, let's table it to the end of the meeting if we could have a motion to move. There's Dave. Oh, good. Yay. We're on 859. Good luck with that.
I can start. Uh David Clark uh Clark Engineering on behalf of uh 859. Uh so the project's 99.9% done. Um the uh refuge contractor has a extremely difficult time or actually refuses to uh
service the dumpster in the enclosure that was provided behind the building. So right now it's sitting in the parking lot. Um, so we found a spot where we can take up some pavement, add some more pavement. It's right on the edge of the
100. Um, still inside the fence. Um, but uh, we're asking this as a field change. Um, I'm going to add some more plants um to the planting bed that's that's around it. And uh, it's already been to planting board and it's already been to
HBDC. This is the last stop. Thank you. Anybody have any questions, comments on this? You stand there and look and it's the only place it can go. It makes a lot of sense. Yeah.
So, it's you say that it increases the coverage in the outer aura by 55 square feet. Is that just that piece that that's just that piece? And to to offset that, we're taking up some pavement. Um, and although it increases it by 50, it's 55 square feet over the asbuilt
conditions. Okay. some what was permitted by all the boards including the commission was was a little bit more sight coverage within that area. So it's it's slightly less than 50 square feet altogether. Okay. That's what I was going to ask is the numbers weren't adding up right now. Yeah, they weren't.
Um so when you take up the pavement, what are you what are you putting? Um they're going to just put a a per pvious pavers in there. Okay. So Okay. So that makes more sense. Okay. Thank you. Anybody else?
This is pretty straightforward. I got a question, Carol. Go ahead. Uh, the plants that are going to uh be planted natives or Yep. All the all the same species that that have been planted in that corner. Okay. Thank you.
Anybody have anything else? All right. I can think we can have a motion to approve. I move that we approve the field change request for 859 Main Street. Second. Okay. Bob I. Eric I. Elise I. Janet I.
Paul. Hi. And I say I. So you're all set. Thank you. Okay. Next one. Paul, please. Next on the agenda is a field change request. The address is 97 Tilip Run. the owner
TR nominee trust map 14 A3 parcel 2-B DP number SE 103690 the project uh is shoreline protection and restoration and the field change request is to address design changes
okay here go ahead presenting yep can I just do a I have a very brief presentation um so I'll just request a screen share Okay. You should be able to share. You should
be able to. I Oh, okay. I can bring it up if you can. Uh, how do I screen. Usually we don't have to approve it. There we go. We're good. We're good.
Okay. Share a different screen. It's not going to share that one. I thought you were sharing it. I I was, but it was the wrong screen. I will uh Okay. It's more challenging than it needs to be.
That's up. There we go. All right. There we go. Can everyone see that now? Yes. Can you see that now? Yes. Perfect. All right. So, um here for 97 Tilt Bure Run, um we are requesting a field change for
the project um for construction of a stone paver patio in lie of a stone paver walking path on the site. So, just um quick project status update. So, we have the order conditions um that
was originally issued back in um it's uh September of last year, not this year. Apologies for that. Um this project's part of the larger shoreline protection project going on at 5975 and 97. um project the um the portion of
the project related to the revetment is substantially complete at this point and the um the upland work is ongoing. There's been some planting done like I said this patio's been done but the planting is ongoing at this point. So summary of
field change. So the original plan had 349 square ft of um salvage stepping stones. Um, and we have some graphics coming up to go with this, but the uh the stepping stones went from the pool area and then followed um near the shoreline along to the southern border
of the site um where when this project started, when the emergency was originally issued, there was still a beach over there. The hope was to have um access to that beach area via this walking path. Since that time, the beach is more or less gone. There's not really any value
in having the path going in that direction. So, um the the stepping stone pathway was swapped for a um stone. It's it's really the same the same material was used just to
construct a patio and a small walking path of equivalent area. Um the patio is just um ouch u just it's between the pool area and the crest of the revetment. Um, we relocated a few plantings uh in order to make room for
the patio, but really the plantings were moved from the spot where they were originally to where the um walking path was. And um no change in planting species or quantities. All that remains unchanged from the approved plan.
So, um like I said, the patio is equivalent in area to what was approved for the walking path. It's just in patio form instead of pathway form. Um there's no increase in resource area impacts and no changes to any of the conditions are required for this change.
Um and just uh sharing the originally approved planting plan here. So you can see this is the pool area here. Um there was a couple or there was a few uh granite landscaping steps and then a um paver pathway that came all the way
to the southern end of the site. And in the uh the revised plan, you can see we have um a short pathway here and then we have a patio in this area and then all of this area where the pathway was will be planted. Um you can see the
tables here, same quantities and same species um of plantings that were in the originally approved plant. And then um pictures of what's out there. So, um this is a picture of the
patio here with the um the stone pa walkway. Um and then just same view here. You can see some of the plantings have been installed uh to date. And that's it. So, with that, I will open it up to um discussion and
questions from the commission. Okay. Thank you. Uh anybody wish to start comment? I think you want to start. No. Um, can you tell me why you're coming to us
after the work was done and not to get approval before you did this? Sure. So, we um, unfortunately with this job, the applicant at 97 does not own or have really control over the site
access. um the work at the neighboring property is rapidly finishing and he was um essentially I don't want to say forced but didn't really have a choice in agreeing to um ending use of that access and this work could not be done without
that access. So it it more or less was either do it now or never do it um because there's no way to get heavy equipment in there to move these to put in a patio. The these these are large like these are pretty large pieces of granite. They weigh 2 to 300 lb each. moving these by
hand. Each piece and these are you said they're the same materials used. These were already there and just aren't they being repos reused was what has always
been said or are they brand new? They are. It's the same material that was going to be used for a pathway but instead was used for a patio. It's the same. They're they're granite. I call them pavers. They're slabs of granite basically. Okay. So the answer the answer is yes. I the
same materials. Yes, same material. But the order says that the that the stones that were existing on the site would be repurposed into the stepping stones. So are these the ex the stones that existed before or are they brand new? They look
new. I'll tell you that. But they're new. They're not repurposed from what existed on the property previously there. There was nothing on site previously for these because that's what the order said that they were stones
that were being repurposed. So, which means that they were on the property before and that's what was submitted to us. And I I I will tell you I still have an issue with the fact that this is after
the fact. And you know, we it I I just I feel I feel very strongly about that aspect of it. I'll just leave it there for now. Um anybody
else want to comment? I agree, Paul. Okay. I I'll also comment that it is as a as as a something that's obvious, but it becomes even more obvious when you stand there and look at
it. Um a patio is not the same as stepping stones individual. Even though if you measure each one up and you measure the patio, technically the coverage is the same. when you put them all together and create this very large imperous surface
right at the edge of the revetment, it's just not the same. It becomes a viewing patio, not stepping stones to be able to access the beach. So, it's a it's an amenity that the house did not have um frankly in my view doesn't need and was
not requested in advance. So I'm and the part of my thing is yeah I I get that there's been more erosion and that's why that beach disappeared that they had the stepping stones going to but they must have
realized that that beach had eroded a while ago to come up with a new plan of what they wanted yet and it a field chain you know It's not like it was going to take months for a field change
to come to us. So, right, but we didn't have we we literally didn't have months. Like, the owner is not allowed to use that access anymore. He has not been allowed to use it now for I get that. But so the erosion that didn't allow the
patio happened that recently that you couldn't come to us to say it can't be you the stepping stones can't be used to get to the beach because the beach is gone. This wasn't something that this this part of the project wasn't even looked
at until the planting was started. This plan is over a year old at this point already. Right. a year in Toughby Run, Pleasant Bay time is a significant difference and I think we all get it that but I I still
well I obviously I still have an issue with the after the fact and doing it rather than we need this and having an opportunity and submitting it and I mean it's obviously been done for a
little while And I I still believe it could have been done before even if you had the stones I don't know put someplace I it's just that's my feeling. So with that anybody else have
anything else to say? I would I would say were you going to go Eric? You want to go first? Um yeah I'm a little more sympathetic. I mean I don't have has there been any violations on this job other than this one? Yes, their hats.
Yes. So, lessons aren't learned. Um I've I've been on big jobs. I can't even imagine this one. Um some sometimes, you know, you get in the heat of battle there and decisions are made and like he stated, they the access was going away.
So, you were able to bring a machine to move the stones around and then it was decided to do this. Uh what keeps in my mind the same square footage was used. Um anyway, um I'd hate to see them uh go through
the cost of removing it and moving it around. I don't even know how they're going to do it. Get a machine in there. They're going to have to have a lot of guys move them around. But um I'd be inclined to, you know, Okay. Let this one go.
Thank you. I I would I would say I would say that um as a commission I believe that we've been very responsive to this particular property to all our properties, but this one's been very um challenging for both sides of the fence.
I was disappointed and rather surprised when I saw the material come in with a patio. Um, and I I think that the to Eric's point, less lessons weren't learned from doing things the
right way previously, you can submit things to our agent and get a response the same day if it's something very very critical. So, this is a in my opinion, this is a big change from what we were presented and it's
disappointing. Anybody else? Then we need a motion. I move that we approve the uh field change request for 97 Tippy Run. I I I second that. I I'll agree with
that. Okay. Paul. Nay. Janet. No. Elise, no. Eric, uh, yes, I'm I I Bob, no. And I'm a no. So, it has been
denied. Okay. Shocked. I I I understand. So, I guess do we need to follow up with like a new order to remove it? Like what's the next step with the commission then?
Paul, what would and they file act now that I've created mess. What's the Well, um, you know, to the extent you can go back to the original plan. Yeah. Um, but I think what he's
saying is that some of that land is gone, so that can't be done. Um, as far as the patio goes, um, I maybe the commission can articulate what it is you want, uh, with the mitigation and and the
restoration. So, he can present something um, you know, for your approval down the road because at this point, you know, this stuff's already out there. So, it's Do you want it taken out and then, you know, where do we go from
there? because some of the land some of the land is gone. So you can't right you can't do it. Um so the concept of using the stones to create a access pathway stepping stones to the beach no longer
applies because you it's an access to nothing. So um like you know you can you can leave the stones the the walking path stones but they don't go anywhere. My objection aside from the, you know,
the timing of all of this and not asking permission ahead of time and want the patio is the patio. I mean, you look at that and you know, I mean, it's going to be furnished. It's going to be a a used patio, an area that is just nothing like
what was envisioned for this project, which came to us under an emergency authorization. And somehow at the end of it, you've got this big patio area and it's a it's a killer view from that patio. But you know that I I think where
I come out is if if that had been um proposed originally, I still would have not wanted to approve it because it's too close to the edge. It's too much use in that particular area. We know this this area. I mean, you've got this
larger reetment. you know, maybe that'll hold it, but maybe not. And so now you have even more hardcape that's at risk of going into the harbor, and that's just not something I would approve. And I I agree with Janet. I think
stepping stones is one thing. The patios, I mean, yes, the timing is was an issue for me, but that patio is more than what we had approved. changing the location of stepping stones.
Okay, we understand. But um making a patio was not what we had originally approved. And the fact that then you're coming to us afterwards and saying that that you want a patio now, it's a it's a very
different animal than stepping stones. I'm going to jump in here for a sec. This is Brian Angus also with Tyen Bond. I think we let us um chat with the client and his OPM and then we will
follow up with Paul. And I think just to rephrase Dan's question, I think it would be, you know, if if the intent is for the patio to remain, is this an amended a request for an amended order of conditions? um because I believe that's the the sort of administrative
outcome of the commission denying a field change request. Doesn't sound like it. Um I I I I think we have a and I shouldn't speak for everybody, but I'll speak for myself. The patio is an issue. Amended
field change, whatever. The patio is an issue. Yeah. No, I think we hear that loud and clear and I think we're trying to figure out the steps, you know, even even the we need to figure out what the owner wants to do
in response to this um decision and then just saying we will we'll follow up to confirm the appropriate next steps with you guys. That's um Yeah. Okay. I'm I'm thinking out loud a little bit here because it it it is it's such an
evolving site. Like what was permitted doesn't work there anymore. What has been installed the commission doesn't approve. I just don't know what the next you know what what the next uh I don't even know what to call it. Solution proposal will be
there. So let us Yeah. Let us figure that out. Yeah. I think you'll probably need to go back obviously to the owner and and see and and we'll look forward to hearing the next step. Sorry, Dan. Didn't mean to steal your
mic, but it's all good. Thank you. All right, so Paul, I think we can move on to the next Go ahead, Paul. Um, do you want to continue this
to a date certain to have them either well I think procedurally file an amendment or come up with a concept plan um that you're comfortable with. I think the other option is just to deny it. I think we we did deny it. Give me the
choice. Yeah. Okay. And I think at this point it's tabled and let them figure out another a different solution and come back. Okay. So I don't know how long that would take.
Paul's in our court. Yep. All right. Thank you, Paul. You're welcome. All right. Next one. Uh, next on the agenda is uh a request for a determination of applicability 187 cockove road Susan um
Belella and Kelly Rasca map 4C parcel 28-12A R-25-9 project is upgrade a failed cesspool to a title 5 subsurface disposal system and installation of four mitigation trees.
Good afternoon, David Clark and Clark Engineering on behalf of the applicants. Um, so they um I think they're the third generation owners of this property. Uh, their grandparents built this uh back in uh the mid50s. It's been served by the
same cesspool since then. Um truly one of the last summer cottages on Kakov road. Um, so, uh, they got news last fall that, um, they had it p pumped at the end of the season that it was in tough shape and they really should start
making plans to, uh, replace it. Um, so after thinking about it over the winter, they move forward with the with the plan. Given the size of the lot, uh, there's really zero options as to where to put this system. Um um we went to the board
of health the other day and they granted the variances that you see on the plan to site it where it is. Basically it is as far away from the uh the top of the bank as possible. Um we're pretty sure that at least one tree most likely two
trees will have to come out for the excavation for the tank and the and the leech field. Um so we we show four retrace replacement trees. Uh hopefully the commission will understand that it might be not the exact location they go but with the intent is to plant four
trees somewhere down on that end of the property. The existing cesspool will be pumped and filled with sand and that area um dressed off and planted with uh native fescue uh to
uh stabilize the area. Be happy to answer questions. Thank you. Anyone have questions, comments? Well, I think it's either that or have a bouse house. I mean, what what else are
you going to do, right? I mean, I I I appreciate that you you truly moved it as far as as humanly possible. Yes. Yeah. It's a very tough lot to to work with and happy to say goodbye to a
cesspool. Yeah. Anybody else? Bob? Yeah, I got something. David, the uh there's a large pine as well. Uh you don't think that's going to be uh affected at all? No. And um and I re I really want to keep that
one because of the size of it. Um if we have to move the septic tank, uh basically we want to notify the the contractor that if if it needs to be slid to the uh to the north of the septic tank, then uh they they need to
do that. Um it's just way I show it, it's a direct shot coming out of the out of the foundation. But if they need to move it, that just means a couple more bends in the pipe. Um but the idea is to is to only take out two trees. Mhm. Will they put like uh some fencing around
that tree or We can before before construction starts. Um we haven't we haven't made the final The Board of Health wanted two adjustments to the plan and that was basically the type of structures going in the ground. Make sure that there are vehicle they can support a vehicle load. Um so we haven't
filed that plan yet, but I can add a note to the plan saying uh to protect that large pine. Thank you. Also the uh so it's just going to be temporary irrigation to water the lawn. Yes.
And the uh you got that's that's a real Cape Cod. Yes, it is. Yeah. Sand. And uh you just you got to provide adequate spacing for those replacement trees. Yes. Okay. Thank you.
Anybody else? Okay, I think we can have a motion to approve, please. I move that we approve the request for determination of applicability for 186 Cole Cove. What?
Kak Cove Road as a negative three. Yep. Second. Okay. Paul, I Janet. Hi, Elise. Hi, Eric. Hi, Bob. Hi. And I say I. Thank you.
Okay, Paul. Next. Thank you, Madam Chair. Next on the agenda is a notice of intent uh 141 uh Absun Amy and Anthony uh Tatron. I apologize for my pronunciations. Map
12, parcel 23- A20, DP number SC 103718. Project is dock and stair reconstruction. It was continued from February 12th, 2025 and March 5th, 2025. And the applicants requested a
continuence to August 27th, 2025. So I move that we continue 141 Absagami Run to August 27th, 2025. Second. Okay. Bob I, Eric, I, Elise, I. Janet, I Paul, hi.
And I say I. All right. Next one, please. Next is a U submitted notice of intent. The address is 20 L Street, Karen Laakco, map 10F, parcel R9, DP number SC 10,
3730. Remove and replace pond assets access stairs. It was continued from May 7th, 2025, and the applicant requested continuous to July 23rd, 2025. I move that we continue 20 L Street to July 23rd, 2025. Second. Okay. Paul. Hi.
Janet. Hi. Elise. Hi. Eric. Hi. Bob. Hi. And I say I. So, thank you. Next. Paul. Next on the agenda is a notice of intent 237 and 263 Woodland Way. Uh, owner is Woodland Way
Nominee Trust Map 11K parcels HC48 and HC49. D number SC 103734. The project was for removal of two boat houses, construction of one new boat house, and access stairs within a coastal bank.
Good afternoon, David Clark, Clark Engineering, and Steve from Wilkinson Ecological Design. Um on behalf of the Gitlin family, um this is on the last piece of the puzzle for the the Gitlins. Um, if you've been
out to the site or you've been on the commission long enough, you know that they're rebuilding the uh the two houses uh and those projects are almost nearly complete and it's been on their minds what to do with the the two boat houses
on on those properties. Um so uh after a few years of uh contemplation they decided to to completely eliminate all the waterfront structures on 237 and uh rebuild the one boat house on
263. So uh so that's what the plan is for. uh the boat house, the deck, the stairs, and there's a little bit of a bulkhead uh protecting the bank there. Uh that
will all come out. Um there's an old footpath. There are some sleepers there uh that we've we've located, but it hasn't been used in a long long time. Um that'll all get restored. Um and then
all that activity shifts over to 263. Um What we're showing there is an improved access down to the water. There are some uh at grade steps um a foot path and then uh traditional uh elevated stairway
that gets you down to the water and the boat house. Uh so all those stairs will be replaced. Uh some of the adrade steps um we felt that uh a little bit too steep and then converting that to an elevated stairway.
And then the last stretch up by the house um uh will be shifted a little bit to the to the north uh to to the west and uh converted to u an elevated stairway. At the end of the day, um
there is an increase in site coverage on 263. Obviously, there's a decrease on 237 because of all the removal. Um we're providing restoration and a little bit of mitigation um
because there is a a net increase of of structure um if you discount 100% that old footpath that's going to get restored. Um but if you include the foot path there between the two properties is a net reduction of a little over 500
square ft. Um so that's it in a nutshell. Well, everything's above the mean high water mark. Uh, so no chapter 91's involved. I know Paul had called me and and had concerns about the ACE and the
prohibition of new pile new uh structures, but that's under the chapter 91 program. We're above main high water, so no chapter 91 permitting is required. Um, still has to go to ZBA. That's
scheduled for tomorrow. Um, usually you have a month or two to, but uh, this one we cut it close. Um, so if there's any any questions on the engineer plan, be happy to answer them. And Steve is here to talk about u how are they going to go
about restoring the the disturbed areas. Yeah, thank you. Uh, Steven Lee with Wilkinson Ecological Design representing the applicant and um, just quite simply um, we will just be vegetating the areas where structure is being removed. um providing uh a native maritime uh
planting that has performed well in uh shade tolerant sites like this. Um I will just say for the 35 native shrubs that we're planning on planting, we will be uh targeting the six feet on center. Um they just weren't shown on this plan
just with the the targeted narrow aspects of the uh the project areas. uh we would just like our our team to kind of field locate the best uh plant selections on the embankment once the areas are cleared and beyond that I'd be happy to answer any questions.
Okay. Uh anybody want to start? Eric, go ahead. Um so the the boat house is getting removed. Um, did you count the so the debris on the left facing looking at the boat house
from the water? That debris that's piled up on the left that's also getting removed. Looks like old pilings of something. Yes. Yeah. Um, I think 237 had a dock at one time. Yeah, I think so. And it does have a chapter 91 permit, but obviously it hasn't been used in two years. So,
all local permits have have uh Wow. Bummer. are gone. Um, and there's there's no permitting path available now with a prohibition of because everybody would treat this as a new dock. So, yeah, all that stuff can come out. The
uh the I'm looking at the mitigation involved. I stood on the uh observation deck there. Um I mean I saw scattered mitigation already provided here and there down the banking um with with irrigation heads on three
four foot stakes. Uh I couldn't believe it. Um but I guess you had to water them. I to me it's not that important for those few steps to take out there. I mean you just leave them in there and just let the stuff grow around them. Um, I'm looking at this project. Uh, you
know, I to have an above ground stairway. I always think it's great. I used to didn't think that way before, but now that I've seen it happen, it's better to be above ground and let vegetation just naturally grow under them. It seems to work better than the oldfashioned uh steps, uh, you know, in
the ground like they did in the old days. Um, now as as far as the shed goes, I mean, obviously it was probably from the 60s and 70s. Um so it's uh whether or not it's permitted it's there so someone permitted it. Um you know
back in them days government was very small so uh you know mostly was uh permits were on houses. Uh I grew up and people were building horse barns and tractor barns and uh everybody had a shed. I mean we had a shed. Sometimes I
come home late for curfew and my father told me to please use the accommodations that the shed provides for the night and come in for breakfast. So, uh, so you know, I mean, I don't see anything wrong with the shed. Now, what I do find a
problem is is that you're you're you're in the NDZ and you got an increase of uh 22 about 225 square ft. Um, and u I'm one of them oldfashioned ones that believe that mitigation for impervious
should be impervious. And I have to I'm looking at a sacrificial lamb on that uh might be painful, but there's a sacrificial lamb on that banking uh that that will be about 225 square ft that I think is a
better mitigation. Uh and that's that observation deck should be removed. Uh if you move the observation jack uh deck, you're even on square footage in the NDZ and it's uh it's a fair deal. Um, so I'll pass with that. Thank you.
Thank you. Anybody else? Go ahead, J. All right. So, when this came to us before for the initial redevelopment of the house, and by the way, we did have a round and around and around about that deck. Um, but we ended up let letting it stay
there. Um the structure on 267 and all of those plans was labeled a shed and somehow now it's been relabeled and transformed into a boat house. It it serves the same purpose storing
storing things. So, it's not it's just restoring like kayaks or boards or it doesn't it's not the kind of boat house that requires immediate access to the water. Well, it does uh in that it it does now.
And well, but you're going to have to go down the stairs. Right. Right. Carrying whatever it is you're taking out of there. It just felt like a little putting the cart before the horse to have changed the name from a shed to a boat house because a boat house is much more of a
water dependent uh kind of activity. Um, but I like I like uh Eric's suggestion because we we did give up on our opposition to that deck last time and here's an opportunity and it's almost the same size um as these stairs. So, I
think that's a great trade and a good mitigation pro prospect. So, that's it. Anyone else? Do you have anything? No. Okay. Um I very much agree with Eric and Janet. Uh
one question I have is because I was wandering near that uh first deck that's at 237 and looking at what's on the hill. A lot of those stairs that you say you're removing are sort of rotten or
hard to see. Is there a reason that they have to be removed? No, we we just thought it was beneficial to remove them. I mean, it it's almost more of a disturbance to remove them. And you might also have erosion issues because
maybe they're doing something there. I just I mean they're hard to find to tell you the truth because I had a hard time finding them. Um, I was wandering all through that m that little mitigation and I was
all over the place and I was, you know, it was hard to find them. So, I would I personally would rather see them when they're pretty rotten and they're in the ground.
Let let them be. I mean, you could seed over and and they're just going to disappear. I think I I think it'd be easy to work around them. I believe so. Yeah. Okay. Just to speak to that with removal, we were proposing um erosion
control blanketing. Uh right. You got to do that anyway. Yeah. Yeah. But I just think it it's might be work that's not necessary. Absolutely. Um in my opinion. So that's my comment. Um
anybody else? Bob? Uh yeah. Uh there's a currently there's a retaining wall right behind that shed, right? Retaining the bank on 263. Yes. You're going to you're going to replace that or We don't think we need to. We we
think we can um we can build the addition the the the new boat house and and have that wall be retained by the by the boat house. But uh by the foundation, I'll confirm that when we come back. I was I that I sort of thought that that was going to be like
the back part of the boat house. So that it because it's a little bit bigger and from the picture it looks like the new one goes back to meet almost that wall was what I was thinking. So hopefully
and the uh the seed mix you're going to use uh after you uh construct the stairs uh you're going to be able to seed under the stairs to uh provide some uh erosion control as well. Yeah, absolutely.
Okay, that's all I had. Thank you. Anybody else? Okay. So, sound to me like there's not there aren't really issues. I think, you know, we want you to seat under the
stairs. That retaining wall will remain. Um, you'll leave the rotten stairs that are barely visible. Um and of course like they have temporary irrigation they'll have temporary
irrigation again. Um eventually all that temporary irrigation does have to be taken out. It's so um the only question is that deck
and whether it can be removed. Okay. So, um I will propose that uh to the owners. Uh in lie of that, um they might want to make the boat house smaller or try to reduce the size of the
of the elevated stairs to get that 240 number down. Uh and the other option is to to rebuild them both uh in kind. Um so I will run that all by them and Okay.
So when would you like us to continue this too? Um, I don't know if we can get everything pulled together by the 14th. Um, is that your next meeting? The 14th. Our next is July 23rd and then we have August 13th.
Oh, the 23rd. We can get everything by the Okay. So, you want to continue to the 23rd? Okay. Okay. I move that I I just wanted to add um you know when I look at this property it's it's uh it really shows
how beneficial it is to have a buffer between properties and and the resource area whatever it is because if you go in behind that property of course when I was growing up they used to call it look at your healthy lawn but I can guarantee
you just in the backyard it's probably 400 lb a year of herbicide and pesticides side and nitrogen and and fungicide put on that lawn to keep it that way and and to have a buffer between something like that and
the resource area is this is this is why we're here. Thanks. Okay. So, could I have a motion? So, I move that we continue 237 and 263
Woodland Way to July 23rd, 2025. Second. Okay. Bob, hi. Eric, hi. Elise, hi. Janet, hi. Paul, hi. And I say I. So, we'll see you the 23rd. Um, CDA is expecting a comment letter. Um, so I'm
not sure what you have to say at this point. Um, that's tomorrow. That's tomorrow. Yeah. Paul, we can send it. Uh Crystal's not here tomorrow, but we can send an email um to Sarah indicating that the project
can be approved uh under the performance standards. This is generally it's a general statement. Yeah, that's usually what we say, David. Okay. It's just um if if we're going to change the size of
which I can probably figure out before the meeting tomorrow, um we might have to Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. All right, Paul. Next. Okay. Uh, next on the agenda is a uh
certificate of compliance request. Uh, the address is 444 Old Harbor Road, aka 450, Susan B. Morgan, map 16G, parcel 11- K4, DP number SE 10152. The project was reconstruct pier,
seasonal ramp and float and construct access access stairs. Um work under this uh order was never started. So we just need to close it. Okay. If we could have a motion, please. I move that
we close the approve approve the certificate of compliance for 444 Old Harbor Road. Second. Okay. Paul. Hi, Lee. Hi, Janet. Hi, Bob. Hi,
Eric. Hi. Mix it up. Yeah. Okay. The next one, please. Um, just give me one second. I'm going to get out of this. Um, if Hunter can bring back the screen, there's probably um
Lichfield probably wants to chime in on the next one. Okay. Uh, next on the agenda is uh 444 Old Harbor Road. Susan Morgan, map 16G, parcel X4, DP number SE 1024 22247.
Uh the project was bulkhead replacement uh an extension uh of the bulkhead project. Uh this was Did you all have a chance to go out and see it? There's four properties involved here um with nourishment. This is that
little house down on the water. The bulkhead was installed back in The order was approved back in 2006. Uh the application is complete. Uh they did an inspection in 2011 2025 and um I went out and took a look at it.
I think it it's an old one but it's in substantial compliance. Um there are complicated nourishment uh conditions. What I thought I would just do is include the uh ongoing conditions that are in the
order without getting into um these side agreements that the owners had about who was going to pay for what and where access was going to be. So, I would recommend just approving this um with ongoing conditions as listed in the
order. Okay. And this is we're just approving four 444 Old Harbor Road because then there's the next one is I think for has all the neighbors. Yes. So that's really truly the more complicated
one. Correct. Right. Okay. I kind of jumped ahead. Sorry. No, that's okay. I just wanted to make sure we all are understanding what we're voting on. I'm I'm I'm just want to clarify. So yeah, this this request this is for SE 10 2611
and then there's a separate number 20 22 47 is what we're dealing with right now which is 2247 is the one that's just old harbor 2611 is the multi-propy no that's yeah 2611
is the multiropy uh 2247 is this one that's is the actual bulkhead work that was done. I just wanted to make sure I'm No, I apologize. When this was done, it was
a mess to just kind of unravel. So, we do have a raised hand. John, yes, thank you, Madam Chair. For the record, John Bolognia, Italian Bond, formerly with Coastal Engineering. Yeah, this goes back uh 20ome years. This was an old coastal engineering project. Um,
as you mentioned, there are several order conditions on this project and the property is under agreement. So, the owners are trying to just decline to clean up the certificates and so forth. Um, so the one that you just voted for was uh uh you know, the uh the boat ramp
and I'm sorry, the pier and the ramp and the float and so forth. So, that never got built. Clean up. That was easy peasy. The next two uh are the we're just right now if I could stop you. We're just dealing with um 2247
right now. My apologies if I jumped ahead to the No, that's fine. But if you if you would like to address the 2247 SE number work, great. And then we can get to the next one which has all the
properties. Yeah, appreciate that madam. Uh it's uh it's the linkage is because that's a you know essentially filed under uh one the the 2611 was uh kind of another amendment to the 2247 which is the one we're talking about right now.
Uh the reason I chimed in is because there's a request for a kind of ongoing condition for the beach nourishment and uh and and Paul maybe you can correct me if I'm wrong here but uh there's another application filed by East Southeast
under DEC 10 uh 3335 that also has ongoing conditions. And so I mean just for the purpose of cleaning up the paperwork if you will um to clean up as many of these old orders conditions and essentially just have
that one as an ongoing is sort of what u what I would suggest just so that you can kind of clean this one up get it off the off the book so to speak and and then just have one clean order conditions or significant compliance with the continuation going on. So that that's that would be my request. What
was the request? Well, essentially just to to close out this order conditions, you know, issue a certificate without any ongoing conditions and uh and and lump all the link the uh ongoing uh conditions for the nourishment onto the other uh order
conditions under SC 10335. We're not closing. We're not going to take ongoing conditions that should be for 444 Old Harbor Road for 2247 and and put them into the they're going
to have separate ongoing conditions. So that's just the way we're not going to close out something without ongoing conditions because that that gives up they're able to do
anything they want. This is just the bulkhead replacement and extension project, right? This is just the bulkhead replacement and extension. So there will be ongoing conditions on that and um if you have a problem with the
ongoing conditions speak now but otherwise we're not going to prove this without any ongoing conditions. I can assure you of that. Thank I I appreciate that. I just uh thought I'd make that point. Um thank
you. All right. Thank you. All right. Ready? So yes, with the ongoing conditions as stated by Paul, yep. I move that we approve the certificate of compliance for 444 Old Harbor Road with the ongoing conditions uh in which are
in the order and as stated by our agent. Second. Okay. Bob I, Eric, I Janet I Paul I and I say I. Okay. Could we have the next call? Sure. We get even more complicated. Um, the next one. Oh,
do we have No. Oh, Bill Lichfield. Okay, Bill. Sorry, Bill. Sorry. Thank you, Madam Chair. Just a minor point. Uh, several years ago, I represent the buyer of this property. Uh, several years ago, the town changed the house numbers for
most of the properties coming down the hill. And before the uh certificate of compliance is finalized, it might make sense to update those numbers. For instance, uh the house at the bottom, the subject property is now numbered
4550 Old Harbor Road can be addressed uh in the paperwork, but I simply wanted to note that I did see on the first one where the work was never done, it did say AKA450. So, we probably could add that onto this
second certificate of compliance and put AKA450. Would that work? Yeah, the the uh the title reference and the assessor reference are going to be correct anyway, but just for going forward, it might the AKA would certainly be fine.
Okay, thank you. Thank you so much. Okay, Paul. Ready? Okay. Uh, next on the agenda is uh, certificate compliance request for 440, 442, 444 Old Harbor Road and 594 Shore Road. Susan Morgan is
the applicant map 16G parcel X1, X2, X3, X4, and H1 D number SE 102611. Uh this was for a bulkhead extension and also did involve nourishment
um with ongoing conditions project was done in 2006. This is all the same property. Um, right. And this is the one that has the um sort of the side agreements about the nourishment. And uh all all I'd like to do is just
add one condition uh in addition to those that are in the orders um that the uh uh agent and um the coastal resiliency director, which is now Ted's position, that's what they're calling it. um that
Katherine has um uh be contacted and go on site to make sure that the uh sand is compatible uh and that there are um any conditions that need to be sort of dealt with in terms of protocols, construction
protocols, things like that. Uh so prior to the nourishment um that would make sense um for us to have some role in that given this is a very old project. If you went out there and saw it um uh
it's going to probably be substantial nourishment over the years being done out there. Um so and there's marsh next to it. Okay. I I agree. I think that that that condition needs to be added as well. Um anybody comments? Go ahead,
Eric. Yeah. Um, wasn't one of the agreements also that the the property south was also supposed to be nourished in case it was caused scarping? When you say south, you're talking about the one way up on the hill or Well, they
have a little bit of the property that's south of the 440. I mean, I think that dur they made a deal where they were going to also make sure they nourished any scarping that happened on the they southern property. It did. Uh, and Eric,
the problem with this one is that um, uh, one of those agreements says when the ownership changes, all of the agreements that we previously made are null void. Oh, okay. So, um, I thought the best thing to do is just list the uh, ongoing conditions that are in the
order that the commission issued at that time. they can work out whatever nourishment issues they want. The property rights, all of that we don't get into, but I believe there will be nourishment uh done on that property, Eric. So, I I think you're uh good
question. I think that'll be satisfied. Um and again, this is this was very very convoluted to pull this whole thing together and understand what was done with it back in 2006. That's when I was on. Yeah. Anything else? So, I I' I'd
recommend approval. I don't know if um Mr. Lichfield's still on if he has anything to say. He's on, but I don't see that he's raised his hand. Okay. No, but I'll I'll be happy to if I could, Madam Chairman. Um, of course. Thank you. Just for your for the
commission's uh reference, there is a note in this order of conditions which already references 2247. It says that nourishment shall be under
under this order shall be completed in accordance I'm paraphrasing in accordance with the requirements under 2247. So there's already sort of a cross reference in the 2000 whatever year 2000 whatever year it was to the prior order
from 2006. Okay, great. Thank you. Anybody else? No. Okay. I move that we approve the certificate of compliance for 440, also known as 450, 442, 444 Old Harbor Road
and 594 Shore Road with the ongoing conditions as noted by the conservation agent. Second. Bob, I. Eric, I Janet I Paul I and I say I. Okay. Then
next next on the agenda is the last certificate of compliance request for 97 TIP run owner is TR 97 nominee trust map 14A3 parcel 2-B D number SC 103690
shoreline protection and restoration project. This is a request for partial COC for the uh revetment and it's just the revetment. Just the reetment. Hi Dan, Dan Shermikley with Time Bond
representing 97 Tilpy again. Um yeah, just to just um reiterate that we are here just specific specifically to talk about the revetment and conditions specific to the revetment. Nothing with landscaping, nothing with upland and
nothing with u the monitoring. Okay. And with that I again have just a very brief presentation to give. Um, I'm gonna request to screen share again. Just one moment.
All right. There we go. Okay. All right. We can see everyone see that? Yes. Perfect. All right. So again for 97 till it be run here. Um again quick background here original order
permitted September uh 2024 on this um again project part of the larger shoreline protection jobs. So 977559 the um the project activities related to the revetment and construction of the revetment at 97 are substantially
complete and we are here today to request a partial COC just for the revetment um or the construction of the reman I should say um and the underwater stone as well. So the uh work that was permitted um on the
job as a refresher here. So we have construction of the armorstone revetment on the coastal bank. So there was um a little bit of filling and regrading of the embankment geoteexile under layer stone and armorstone. Um the revetment
was um constructed with a crest elevation of plus 16 along the um the eastern facing portion of the site and it slopes off to about um plus 8 at the southern end. It was uh installation of the dumped drip wrap
uh continuing underwater um down to about elevation minus 40 to where the bottom of that large scour hole is at the site. um sand backfill um in shore of the revetment to fill that area and then um installation of the plantings on
the site. So um description of the completed work. So the the armor stone revetment has been completed. The installation of the underwater uh dump drip wrap with the geoteexile has been
completed. Um where's your sister with with the armor stone? It's the you know the geoteexile bedding stone and the two layers of armorstone have been installed. Um stabilization of the upland I will say is in progress. There has been um a good amount of the planting done today but there is still
some planting work. Um that remains to be completed out on site especially with the hot weather that's kind of slowed down the planting a little bit in that regard. Um there was the um the patio that was installed that was the subject of previous field change that is not part
of this partial COC. Um so just so you are aware of that. And then the um the sand nourishment that was acquired by the permits has also been installed and I'm sure you saw that out on site um when you did your sitewalk. So work yet to be completed is finishing
the site restoration um including the plantings. Um restoration of the construction access is ongoing um on the property at 75. I believe they're working on plantings over there right now. And then um all the annual monitoring that's required
um still remains to be completed. So um as part of the construction um there were a few uh relatively minor deviations from um exactly what was on the drawings. So the upper portion of the revetment is a little bit flatter
than what was on the plans. The the original project was a one and a half to one slope. The upper portion it's about a 2.2 on one roughly. It varies a little bit depending where you are on site. Some parts are on two, some might be a little bit less like a 2.3.
um the lower portion of the slope uh and when I say upper and lower that transition points around elevation plus eight um was a little bit steeper than what was on the plan. So it's about a 1.3 um horizontal to one vertical. Uh
the um the there was some under layer stone used in between the two layers of armor stone um in order to try to facilitate construction of the revetment a little better. The um the contractor was having a lot of issues with highly
irregular stones and the stones were actually tending to run a little bit larger than um they were expecting. So in order to get a revetment that even you know resembled somewhat of a uniform slope um they used some under layer
stone in between to provide I'll say a little bit of a bedding layer um just to smooth out some of the really big deviations between the stones. Um the dumped rip wrap um on the plans was supposed to end at about plus three roughly. Um it was continued up somewhat
to plus seven to kind of smooth that transition. um from the sort of smooth the transition of the slope as it heads up as it was on the plans. There was kind of a shelf that was there wasn't really the best detail for um kind of providing a smooth transition. So um
that just smoothed out the slope a little bit there. Um gaps that were larger than 6 in. Um there was some chinking stone used in those. Um again the the owner had some real concerns about safety and just you know people walking on it. Um, and the fact that
like there were there were holes that you could put your whole leg into. These stones were massive out there. So, um, stuff that was really big enough to like fit a whole foot or whole leg in. Like that stuff was chinkedked up. Um, and then the underwater stone um, when we
did the survey afterwards, it tended it came out I'll say a little bit thicker than was what on the plan. We had three foot minimum on the plan. It generally ran about four to five feet in the final condition. Um, there's some variability in that. Obviously, placing stone underwater is not an exact science,
especially with the changing grades at this site. So, it generally ran a little bit thicker than what was on the plans. Um, just some um pictures from the site here. So, this is from back in April. You can see the um this is the dumped stone
underwater kind of continued up to provide kind of a you know I'll say a more smooth transition on the revetment from the water heading up the sand nourishment installed up here. These are the armor stones. Um just another view similarly here you can see the stone
um you can see the uh sorry not the stone the sand nourishment a little bit better in this. And then these are just um a couple pictures from construction here. So you can see you have your um your two layers of armor stone, your bedding stone. This is some of that bedding stone that was used in between the layers to smooth out some of these
um really irregular stones that were in here. And then you got your geoteexile. It's a little tough to see in there, but it's down there. Um just another picture of um during construction here. So this is the bedding stone, your first layer of armor stone, and then the second one is in the process of being put on top of
this as well. Um so we have our record drawing of what was built out there um ready to be submitted. So you can see these are the um the different buffer zones. Hello.
How are you sir? I you need to mute. Thanks. Thank you. Go ahead Daniel. Yep. And Esmer. So um this is the uh asbuilt survey. what was out there. So you have the bethimemetry
was done back in late December, early January. Yeah, December 13th the bethimemetry was done. Um the topo was done a little bit later than that in February and tied together for an asbuilt survey here. Those are the limits of the underwater stone. You can see we covered just the steep part of
the slope here which is what was on the approved plan. Um and so yes, so um request for partial COC. So we in our application we provided a comprehensive table of exactly what conditions um we
are requesting be closed out and which ones will remain open. Um it's not in this presentation because there was there was a lot. I mean if you looked at it there was an extensive list there but it's part of the application. We were very specific about what's being closed and what's remaining open. Um, and
again, we're just here to talk about the revetment, not the upland, not the patio, not the monitoring, just construction of the revetment. Um, and you know, the owner is committed to moving forward with the conditions. Like I said, that record plan's already done.
We have plans in place for the ongoing monitoring that's required for um for Chadam and for a bunch of other regulatory agencies as well at this point. Um, and I think that's it. So, with that, I will open it up to uh discussion
and questions from the commission. Thank you. I do have a letter that Ted Keon, who was the director of coastal resources, um, sent before he retired when he reviewed the revetment knowing
that you were coming for a COC. So, I will read that. I have reviewed the originally approved plans for reconstruction of the revetment at 97 tippy run as compared to the final asbuilt revetment. I also visited the site on several occasions during
construction to observe progress of the project. I offer the following comments for consideration. The site conditions for reconstruction of this reventment were extremely difficult due to several factors including high velocity tidal currents,
open ocean wave exposure, loss of stable upland and toe foundation and difficult construction access to the site. The project necessitated an unusual approach to stabilize the seafloor
seaweed uh seawward of the toaststone and then construct a significant revetment to protect the remaining upland and private residence. As has been identified, the finished revetment was not built in the specific manner as
the original plan. The stone face is not as rough-faced as originally designed and was built with a slightly shallower slope. The project required large amounts of heavy tonnage armor stone which resulted in the use of blasted
ledge rock from off cape as opposed to the more rounded armor stone more commonly used in this region. This type of stone is not as amenable to true rough surface rough faced orientation
and required some modifications to the stone placement. Despite the deviations from the original design plans, the completed revetment appears sound in essentially the same footprint and the engineer has stated it
will function as originally designed. The revetment should not have additional impacts to the wetland resources originally conditioned to be protected. Therefore, I do not see a material reason why the conservation commission could not issue a partial certificate of
compliance for the revetment as constructed. However, this recommendation is based on the unique based on the unique site conditions and constraints associated with this specific project and should not be interpreted as establishing a
precedent for future deviations from a approved plans. So, that was Ted's take on it. Um, does anybody have any questions or comments? Janet.
Yeah. So, Dan, I while I appreciate the uh effort it took to go through the order of conditions uh one by one by one by one and create this table, I think I have a problem with the conditions that
are listed as subject to this COC um going somewhat beyond just the construction of the revetment. So um like I haven't gone through them actually one by one by one by one but
the ones I noticed were you know the special condition two taking care to ensure there's no unpermitted alteration of the NDZ that stays for three years. A lot of the requirements general requirements are enforced for the three
full three-year term of the order um which may be extended if necessary. So I I don't know how to do it other than to I don't think we should attach this to a to a certificate um for fear that it
will it will dis discharge requirements that shouldn't yet be discharged. Um, that said, I mean, maybe we just do it in terms of, you know, the the conditions contained in in sections uh
B, C, and D that pertain to the construction of the revetment and just let the rest of the order stay until we have ready for a complete uh certificate. Does that make sense? It just feels like it goes beyond I I think it does. it uh if you look
under D installation of rock revetment um these are all you know very appropriate ongoing conditions that are related to the revetment only um so those should stay right some of those are going to be ongoing right but the the table I agree um so if you're
issuing a partial foot just for the wall for the revetment I think that the uh ongoing conditions that were listed Dan in the installation of the rock revetment um are appropriate I think you included most of those um
three 11 12 13 15 16 17 and then the others are um not really related to it. So, as Janet said, so I think right can live with the uh ones that are tied to the rebetment, right? And those
are the only ones that we will agree to at this point, which you would have gotten if you came back later and asked for the reupment. Exactly. So, yeah. I can I address that uh to the
commission? This is Brian Angus again for time bond that the table was almost a necessary exercise for us to go through. Frankly, I I I don't think we were expecting at all that it would be attached to a certificate of compliance or anything. And you know, the the
comment in the a comment saying condition noted um that's that's us indicating we know it's not complete and will be ongoing. So, um, however, ju just to say, yeah, we we weren't
expecting the table to be part of the approval. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Um, and I do that we do need to have a monitoring report for this revetment every year. I mean that that is going to
be because this is an unusual situation and it was done in an unusual manner because of the situation. And so we're going to want to know that it's how it's doing because
this was something that's never been done before. You know, building out the the bottom of the ocean. Um, one comment I'll have is when I was there looking for the field change, there are holes
at the top coming. I mean, there's sand that has, I guess, gone down in and I'm just wondering if you all have looked at it recently because it was right where the rocks are and I was thinking, gosh, it already
the sand is disappearing. So I think you need to monitor it more often maybe and the statement that people are walking on it. I'm not exactly thrilled
about um nobody should be walking near the revetment to tell you the truth. Um I I just don't want anything to compromise this revetment. I don't think any of us want to revisit this any time in the near future.
So I I'm sure you don't. We don't. I I think everybody would like to see this work as well as possible. Just as an aside, yeah, I guess just to I guess address some of those. Um so the the applicant's
going to provide monitoring for I believe it's four years as required by the permits like the the town will get those that is already in the works um with the applicant right um with regards to public access and walking I mean I don't have to tell you guys this but
there's public access rights to that shoreline people do it sounds I don't know if it sounds crazy I'm talking about the top of the revetment the the top that's not public access it's private It shouldn't it shouldn't be, but I I would agree with you, but that does not stop people from walking
over there. Um, and then with regards to the uh sand, um, you know, the sand is going to work its way down into the resetment. That's doing what it's supposed to do. So, exactly. But I'm saying you might want to go look and add more already. I've been out there. I've
been out there probably at least once a month to once every two weeks for the last few months. Um, it's working its way down there. That's okay. There's there's spaces between those rocks that are, you know, inches wide, right? And when you get the combination of rain and wind, a little bit of wave action, it, you know, it finds its way down there.
It's doing what it's supposed to do. Yes, I know. I'm just saying it it might need some nourishment now, not not wait. You know, I was there yesterday. All right. So, I was surprised to see
these holes forming. And as far as people walking on it, um, first of all, you have trees and everything. It's not an easy spot to walk on. And it would be somebody coming from 75 and I don't think they're going to want people
walking on their revetment. I mean, these are not the base of the revetment. These are the top and that's their property. It's so hopefully nobody will be and that will be part of the
ongoing conditions. I would say we need to say people should not be walking on a revetments. Yeah. Put a no trespassing sign. Yeah. Whatever whatever you have to do. I think we shouldn't have people walking on them. I have no it's actually people from the natur the nature
preserve to the south like that that's the main um public access point. Obviously he abotss that people walk over they go over to the beach. They come over on the revet that they they're around. Okay. I was just curious how how would you fill the holes? By a wheelbarrow.
I don't know. I mean, how would how would you any any any sinks wheelbarrow it down? Your access is gone. They will Yeah, it'll probably have to be some sort of um situation like that. Um, but the let's see the like I've
already said the revetment is doing what it's supposed to do as part of our annual monitoring. We monitor the nourishment. If it needs more, we'll revisit that at that point. Um, we have permanent conditions that require that, but it's going to go there. It's going to disappear over time. That's Oh, I get
that. No, I I understand that fully, but I just was kind of giving you an FYI that it's happening. Yep. I appreciate that. Thank you. I just had a curious question also. Has there been any signs of scarping on the west side because we had a pretty good storm made a new cut?
I was just curious how's it been holding out? Anybody been looking uh resource people or is how's the scarping on the west side? Anything so far? So, we've been um we've been monitoring the area over there. The revetment's been
performing um well to date. Um you know, it collects a lot of debris over there. seems to, you know, there's kind of an eddy that forms over there and kind of seems to collect a lot of debris, but um generally speaking, it's been performing well. Um there's been, you know, there's been some erosion, I think, on that end
a little bit. That mother nature seems to hate that that whole area down there for some reason, but um to date, we're performing well so far and we'll continue to monitor that um as required by our permits and keep an eye on it and you know, if an issue arises in the future, we'll you know, we'll address that depending on what what happens.
Yeah. Okay. Thank you. There's also some sholing going on with that little landform out in the front. It's actually starting to migrate, which is good. Good. Excellent. Okay, then I think we can have a motion to approve a partial for the revetment
only. I move that we approve the certificate of compliance for 97 Tippy Run. Partial certificate of compliance for the reetment only. Second. Okay. Paul, hi. Janet, hi. Elise, hi. Eric,
hi. Bob, hi. And I say I. Thank you very much. Awesome. Thank you very much. Okay, Paul, the next thing. Okay. Next on the agenda is um the update for 22 Captain Sears Road Eastward Companies is
the applicant map 11C parcel H17 D number SC 10 3354 demolition of an existing dwelling and reconstruction of a new dwelling pool and patio. I think um I'm the one who had asked for this
update um as a result of being on site for the construction project next door. I wanted to didn't want even though we're we're allowed to go there. I felt uncomfortable going on to that property to check out. I was curious because the last we had heard um the mitigation
planting was scheduled to happen in 2024. It had not yet happened. So I wanted to know whether that was done and complete and uh Blue Flex sent in a series of photographs and a report saying indicating about the completion of all of that. So I was that's
appreciated. Um and I did take Teresa's point that um there are poppplers white poppplers on the Captain Sears property that are abuing um where they're coming out on uh
on the property next door. Uh there are similarly there are poppplers on the other side of that property and so it's all very TBD about what's going to happen. We haven't approved the removal of those trees yet. Um just keeping an eye on the fact that they're they have they're spread across all three
properties at this point. So um something to keep an eye on if they threaten the uh the mitigation that is now underway and looks very good by the way. So yeah, thanks to Blue Flax for sending all that in. Yes, that was very helpful and I know
Teresa's away and can't be here. So, um I appreciate that update. All right, Paul. Next thing on the agenda is a discussion. You need your
uh next on the agenda is discussion coastal resiliency article briefing. Okay, I'm trying to Well, I want to share my screen, but it's only letting me Hang on a second. I don't want that window. I want Why is this such a pain?
One second. I don't want to share this window. I don't Hey, now you got to You're making me stop sharing. I only want to share the window that I've got open. All right, hold on a second. So, this is just a uh an introduction to everybody
about a project that um let's see this one works. Yeah, this um has been greenlighted by the town to go forward um for this uh for the next about year I would say.
Um, and if it lets me share, I don't know why it's not. It's only giving me that one. Share this window. That is not the window I want. I want to share this window. What a pain. Well, I had put together some slides just so you don't have to just listen to
me drone on about it. um and and can see what I'm saying. Um but alas, not going to happen that way. Um so anyway, I'll just go on about it. So this is a project that's called the coastal resilience project and it's being driven by a number of uh things that have been
happening in the last couple of years um that affects uh coastline. And so where it has pointed us is that we need to we the town and specifically the conservation commission needs to strengthen some of the protections that
we have in place for um coastal resources and very in particular the coastal flood plane. Um so as you know and it's no surprise to any of us sitting here that there is a reality of uh what's been happening um
on the coast forget it to the coastal flood plane in the last several years. Cancel that. God almighty. No I don't want to do that. I'm just going to exit. How's that? I'm gonna exit.
No, I have this. Here's the the slide. Share this window. That's the one. You got it. Thank god. Got it. Thank God. Right. So, yeah. So, the reality that we all know is that with the increase in atmospheric temperature and in ocean
temperature, we're subject to all of these different forces that are not only not going anywhere, but they are accelerating. So for example, we know that the sea level rise has been about a foot in the last century. Most of that has happened in the last 25 years. So
the rate of that sea level rise is accelerating and is going to continue to accelerate no matter what because this these impacts are baked into the existing conditions in both the atmosphere and the oceans. So that extra heat we know is also driving the
frequency and intensity of the storms hitting the coast. I mean, we just spent this time talking about what some of the results of that. And so, you know, it's presenting these risks of ongoing uh continuing erosion and continuing coastal flooding. And so, you might say, but wait, we already regulate the
coastal flood plane as land subject to coastal storm flowage. True enough, we do. But those protections have failed to keep pace with the changes that we're seeing. So, for example, land subject to coastal storm flowage. Another way of
saying the coastal flood plane, which to me is a lot easier to say and a lot more obvious. It's defined, the limits of that are defined by the FEMA flood plane maps. The FEMA flood plane maps are only historic. They map the extent to
flooding that has happened in the past. And so, they don't take into account what has been predicted and what has been determined to be pretty likely to come in the future. So, it's always a game of catch-up when you're using the FEMA maps. Um, similarly, so since 2014,
I don't you may have noticed that unlike every other resource area, the coastal flood plane has no buffer zone. It was removed by town meeting in 2014 for a bunch of reasons I'm not going to go into, but um so we don't have the ability to protect that by protecting
the area surrounding it. The state um has performance standards for every resource area except this one and there are no regulations or performance standards for the coastal flood plane. There haven't been. That's about to
change. And our own standards are a little bit on the vague side. You know, we talk about flood waters being diverted. We talk about the ability of the land to absorb uh flood water but you know we are stymied every time somebody wants to put hardscape swimming
pool whatever in this in this uh area where you know it should does not belong. So the aim of this project is to strengthen the pro the legal protections that are currently in place. Um the need to do this has been recognized as a
priority at the state level. D has recognized as a priority and has uh is in the process right now of drafting new performance standards. The Cape Cod Commission issued a uh climate action plan a couple years ago recognizing it
as a need priority need. It's identified in the Pleasant Bay Alliance uh 2024 climate adaptation action plan and the town and the local uh climate action network have also identified it as a priority need. So
the good news is some of this stuff has already been put into place. It doesn't nothing needs to be built from scratch here. So the new uh DP regulations and performance standards that are in draft for land subject to coastal storm
flowage um go pretty far toward providing some decent protections. And when when that happens, and sources are keep telling me it's it's it's any day now, although we've heard any day now for a long time. Um, our regulations will have to be updated in any case to
align with the state standards. At the same time, the Cape Cod Commission developed a model coastal resilience bylaw and set of regulations to bring all towns on the Cape up to current standards. Um, and so we I've downloaded
those. It's in our team's folder. I'll give you all the link to it if you want to look at I didn't want we didn't Karen and I talked about we didn't want to give you that model coastal bylaw before you start looking at this because it's a little overwhelming. Um and it's not at
all clear that we need to adopt the whole thing. Um because it can it's actually has techn a lot of technical detail in it such as performance standards that should be in regulation not in a bylaw. So um
we'll be looking at that. Um so what this is going to do, what the project is aiming to do is to use the model bylaw and regulations and DP's upcoming regulations and create two categories of of protections. One are things that have
to go into um an article, a revision to the bylaw. would have to go to town meeting for approval and the other would go into regulations that we would issue once the town meeting has authorized the commission to go forward with this. So that's the that's what the project is. So, if you want to know what the Cape
Cod Commission model coastal bylaw does that's different, it creates what's called a coastal resilient zone which encompasses the current land subject by FEMA maps, but it extends that protection a protected area to areas
that have been demonstrated by what's called the best available model that's been developed that are likely to be flooded between now and 2050 over the next 25 years. And so that expanded protection area pulls in land that is
not currently within land subject that best available model. So, the state um has adopted what's called the Massachusetts Coast Flood Risk Model that was developed by um the Office of Coastal Zone Management working with the
Department of Transportation and the Woods Hole Group um to develop this coastal flood risk model, which is not like um most it doesn't anticipate that that sea level rise is even because it's not. It's very driven by, especially when you're talking about
storm, it's driven by storm surge, it's driven by land topography, it's driven by fetch, it's driven by flood pathways. All of those things are brought into this model to predict where the flooding is likely to happen. And um we're going to be having a community event in
September when the the some of the people from Woods Hole Group who were involved in developing this model will come and they'll bring maps that will illustrate the difference between what is now currently protected under land subject to coastal storm flowage and what their model is predicting um is
beyond that and is likely to be flooded. Um we've put together a small work group to do this work. Um so Greg Burman uh is the one who uh greenlighted this project and he'll be the the leader of the project. Uh Katherine Ricks will be a
part of the work team in her capacity as director of coastal I should say resilience. Um Karen and I will represent the conservation commission and Dee Hull will be representing the energy and climate action committee. Also useful to have her. She's a former
member in fact chair of the conservation commission and a member of the planning board before too. So because there'll be some interplay with with all of those different bodies. So we'll be working on um this summer looking at um the the
model and trying to do that that that process of pulling out what needs to be in a bylaw and what can be in a regulation so that we're ready by the fall to begin bringing these uh drafts. We'll be coming here in the fall to bring the draft and we'll go to you know the the energy and climate committee.
will go to the planning board. We'll go to the select board and we'll be taking uh comment and input from all of them. We'll also begin a pretty robust community engagement and education effort because we've all learned that town meeting ain't predictable. Um, and
uh, the more you can do ahead of time to make people understand that this is a these are common sense responses to reducing and managing our risk, the better because, you know, you can you can reasonably anticipate some concern, some push back, even some objections to
this. So, we're going to be very proactive about reaching uh people in the community to make sure that they really understand why this is being done and it doesn't get subject to another, you know, consom land grab uh kind of uh silliness. So, um we have a we have a
schedule mapped out. Um we are aiming for town meeting uh next spring um because the Pleasant Bay Alliance has identified it um as a priority and because Chadam's one of the four towns in that alliance um all four towns are
going to be pursuing this project. Um yeah, but not necess we're going to go first. Um and uh the other three towns, although Orleans is thinking about going in the spring of 26 as well, but uh Brewster and and Harwitch won't go until 2027.
The alliance has applied for funding from the state. Um expecting a decision like this week. Um, and if that happens, there'll be funding to bring the Cape Cod Commission in and pay them to prepare a lot of the graphics and a lot of the mapping things that can be done
and to work through this process of analyzing the model that they developed um, and how we can best parse it into what absolutely positively has to be in a bylaw and what can go into regulation. So, that's the project. We're going to
try to create what's it to provide legal protection for this coastal resilient zone to provide, you know, better uh more robust um more forwardlooking um protections. And so the conservation
commission will be the entity taking it to town meeting. Um and uh when we get an approval from town meeting, we will then pivot to um getting the performance standards ready to be issued next
summer. So that's a quite ambitious schedule. Um but we think it can be done. We've got a really great team of people who are willing to do this. So we're lucky. That's why we're going because we've got everybody in place. We've got everything ready. There's, as
Greg says, there's no reason to wait another year. Love it. I have one quick question for you. Sure. When you were talking about the the um collaboration and the getting the town involved and all that. Will you engage the summer
residence committee? Good. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. We already have a team of people set to to attend that and introduce the topic to them. That's probably going to be uh maybe not me, but I'll be away. Lucky. Questions? Yeah. I mean, I I think it's an ambitious project. You'll definitely
have push back, I think, because uh there's going to be people that um that claim you're going on predictions um of what could happen. Yep. Um that's a reasonable response from people, too. I get that. So, yeah, I'm sure there's
going to be some push back on it. Yep. I expect it. Um I think that uh that's that's part of what the Cape Cod Commission will be helping with. I watched one town inadvisedly jump the gun and try to um where the
conservation agent appeared before the select board to propose this and it went very very badly. The preparation hadn't been done and the first the one of the one of the select board members said but but but I've got a shed in what you're probably going to
call a flood area so you're telling me and so she yeah didn't have an answer and it didn't go well and she withdrew it. So, um, lessons were learned. Um, darn it. Um,
so hopefully we don't suffer that same uh fate. So, that's it. And so, we're going to be um briefing you like every month. We'll deliver an update to you. We'll have a folder in our in the in the team's folder where we'll put materials so you can you can look through them and
read through them. Um, but there won't you won't be called on to do anything until we get to a vote next spring. Um, and then voting on a on a on a proposed bylaw and then voting on regulations next summer. But that uh being proactive and educating the public ahead of time
and selling them basically on this is crucial crucial crucial just we and we've seen it too many times where things fail and it's almost always for that reason. That's how we lost the buffer zone to the to the coastal flood plane in the first place because somebody stood up a town meeting and
made some argument. Everybody went, "Oh," you know, and they were caught without a response. Thank you. Good stuff. And as Janet said, we thought probably once a month there would be an update and if there's
nothing to update it, that's what the update will be is that nothing new to present to you guys. But this is something that has to come from conservation. Um, it's going to be under our jurisdiction. So that's why Janet
wanted to present it to us at this point. Yeah. Good job. Don't want to don't want to surprise everybody going. We're doing what? Yeah. No. Um, I don't want to have threats. Well, I didn't want anybody, you know, going to be really careful. You know how word
travels. I didn't want it coming back to us having somebody say, "Oh, I hear this is going on." And and our commission not know anything about it. So that's why um we're we've been briefed at this point,
but there's not a lot to report yet. So having said that, our next agenda, please. And that's reorganization. Okay. Bob's the new chair. Yeah. Microphone wasn't on. I'm sorry.
They're back there in the knock knock. Um, next on the agenda is reorganization of the commission. Okay. Thank you. So, do we have any motions? I have a motion. So, um, you know, after after after a a
year of suff I mean I mean not suffering but uh enjoying the the leadership that Karen has exhibited and uh to which we haven't had a three-hour hearing in the I don't think in the entire year. Um and her ability to keep calm and keep
focused and keep the keep the cats herded uh is really really admirable. And so if she's willing, um, I am honored to nominate Karen to serve another year as the chair. Oh, good. Does that call for a second? Somebody
needs a second. Double second. We need a vote. All right. Paul, I Karen, you're recused. Eric, I Bob, definitely I and I'm so we are unanimous. Okay. Congratulations, Madam
Chair. you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for your willingness to do this. It's it's it's a Thank you for your faith in my ability. That's great. Oh, no. We're cruising along. Yep, we are. Um, and another motion. I have a motion.
Before I get to the motion, I need to second the emotion about Karen. She is a phenomenal leader and the amount of time and energy she has put into this endeavor is just amazing. In that vein,
there's another individual who is willing to step up and fill the role of the vice chair which I am not filling with the fervor and time commitment and sight line to becoming chair because of
other commitments that I can do. I am not going anywhere. I'm going to stay on the commission and I would like to nominate the fabulous Paul Johnson to become vice chair of the commission. Eric, you can calm down.
I will second that. All right. Paul, can recuse Janet? I did you say recluse or recuse? Oh, Eric. Hi, Bob. I I say I
and before we have one last motion, I would very much like to thank Elise for the past year and all the work she has done and you know her invaluable opinions on things and ability to help me all along
the way. So, it's been a huge help and I thank you very much and I'm very glad you aren't leaving. I'm not going anywhere. still with us. We You know, everybody knows this was a life sentence, right? Tap me for what you need until my blood
is gone. So, thank you very much. You're welcome. And we now need another motion. Do I do the motion? Yeah, you're still okay. I'm next time I move that we adjourn the meeting. Second. All right.
Bob, I Eric. Hi, Paul. Hi, Janet. I Elise. Hi. And I say I. We're out. Thank you everyone.