Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. Good afternoon. This is a hearing of the CHAM Conservation Commission being held on December 3rd, 2025 in accordance with the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection
Act and the Town of Chadam Wetlands Protection bylaw and regulations. My name is Karen Latton and I serve as the chair. 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. It's being conducted in person, by phone, and by video conference. The agenda, instructions on how to attend, and copies of documents for review are posted on the town's website. To all participants, whether attending by phone or online, please remain muted unless
you've been recognized by the chair. When recognized, please identify yourself for the record. If you're attending by phone, you can mute and unmute by using star six. If you are online and you are not a commissioner, please keep your camera turned off
unless you've been recognized, indicate that you wish to speak by using the raised hand feature. So, we have a record of a quorum. I will now ask each commissioner to indicate their presence. Vice Chair Paul Johnson, >> present. [clears throat] >> Janet Williams, >> present. >> Elise Gordon,
>> present. >> Eric Hilbert, >> present. >> And Bob Delvecio is unable to attend today. I'm here and we've established we have a quorum. Is there anybody 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 they're being heard. I don't see any hands, any commissioners. Okay. Before we begin the agenda, Bradford, are there announcements of any
requests for continuances today? >> Yes, we have one [clears throat] continuence request for 124 Moon Cussers Lane um which is a certificate of compliance. Um they've requested a continuence to December 17th.
>> Perfect. Thank you. At this point, Bradford Bower, Chadam's assistant conservation agent, will now lead us through the agenda. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. First up is an um an amendment to an order of conditions.
Uh 7D Meadow View Road South, Kyle and Patricia Lac, map 10D, parcel 16-s15 SC 10-3668. Uh proposed addition attached garage and
reconstruction of deck with mitigation. Amendment is to add invasive management and restoration. Rearrange approved mitigation and redesign the driveway. Add retaining wall. Redesign the front entryway and retain uh approved rinse station. [clears throat]
>> Great. Thank you. Hi Teresa. >> Hi. Good afternoon. Terresa Sprag with Bluefax Design here on behalf of the Lissax. Um we did submit an updated plan with the um rinstation removed. Um and we had no comments or questions about the draft order.
>> Perfect. Thank you. Do any commissioners have any additions, changes? Perfect. Then we can have a motion, please. >> I move that we close the hearing on 70 Meadow View Road and approve the amended order of conditions as written.
>> Second. >> Okay. Elise >> I. >> Janet. >> I. >> Paul. >> I. >> Eric. >> I. >> And I say I. That's approved. Thank you. The next, please, Bradford. Next up is a request for determination
of applicability for seven Bucks Lane Lori and Vincent Sansson map 8A parcel 5S-1 R-25-15. Uh this is for an addition to a single family dwelling.
>> Thank you. >> Good afternoon. For the record, I'm I'm John O'Reilly. I believe the owner and applicant is online as well. Uh we're here today for a request for determination. Um Miss Sanzone and her family are looking to update her the second floor
of the dwelling. There is currently um habitable space on the second floor and they're looking to expand out the two dormers. Um and we are looking for a small increase of footprint in the west side of the building that is not within the
flood zone. Um the addition will be over existing step and landing into the house. Um so with that I'd be happy to answer any questions. I did give you a construction protocol as part of my narrative. Uh we are dealing with a uh
land subject to flooding. Um there is no work proposed within the actual uh flooding area other than staging on the existing paved driveway uh off of Hardings Beach as well as uh the paved driveway off of Bucks Lane.
So with that, I'd be happy to answer any questions. >> Great. Thank you very much. Any commissioners have any questions, comments? Anything? Just to clarify, so there's no other resource areas within 100 ft of this area, just the flood plane. >> That's correct.
>> So I kept looking for buffer zone lines and and like I don't see any. So okay, so they weren't >> the only impact is the temporary impact on that paved driveway that you're going to use for staging. >> That's correct. >> Okay. Got it. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Anybody have anything else?
All right, then I think we can have a motion to approve, please. >> I move that we approve the request for determination of applicability with a negative -2 determination for seven Bucks Lane. >> Second. >> Okay, Eric >> I. >> Paul, >> I.
>> Janet, >> I >> and I say I. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Have a great night. >> You too. [clears throat] Okay, Bradford. Next, please. Next up is a notice of intent application for 7,
excuse me, 784 Orleans Road for the town of Chadam, map 11J, parcel 6-6, SC 10-3729. Uh, this is for the enlargement of a of boat and trailer parking within land
subject to coastal storm flowage and relocating the historic communication tower within the buffer zone to a coastal bank. This has been continued from April 23rd, 2025. [clears throat] >> Good afternoon, Katherine Ricks, the coastal resilience director and here
with David and with >> Mike from Blue Flex. So, I know we brought before you the extension of the parking and then the relocation of the tower. We did go to ZBA and they approved the relocation of the Maronei Tower that's out there. Um so mainly the
project is extending five spots of the parking that's with with outside of the conservancy district and then relocating the tower and then we have the mitigation. So David can speak to more of the um >> engineering of it and then we can speak
to the mitigation as well. >> Thank you. >> So David Clark engineering for the record. So, um, since the last time we were here, um, the plan was, uh, vetted with the planning staff and and zoning officer and they made the determination
that, uh, we can't alter the flood plane. So, uh, so the activities that you see uh, as far as expanding the parking lot has all has all been reduced uh, so that there's no alteration of any resource area. So technically all that
work is now outside your jurisdiction. So really the only thing you're reviewing now is the tower move. Um and and we weren't able to reduce the number of trees that are have to be removed. So
Mike is here to talk about how that's going to get mitigated. >> Thank you. >> Good afternoon. Mike Tannis, Blue Flax Design. Uh, I'm going to go over a little history and existing conditions here. So, originally in 2018, an RDA was
filed to maintain and extend walking paths on this parcel. Um, it involved pruning vegetation along existing trails, removing invasive plants, and restoring the project area with native plantings. As of now, [snorts] the the benches,
kiosk, picnic tables have been installed. The paths are well maintained, and the invasive removal has been successful. The proposed planting of native species in that RDA has not been installed, but the area is well vegetated with native little blue stem grasses and native plants, notably bay
berry, are regenerating and filling in the area. Uh thick healthy duff layer in the shaded areas of denser canopy. Invasive plants are well controlled with the exception of two areas, one of Asiatic bittersweet and the other of black locust seedlings. I've
highlighted those in yellow on the on our mitigation plan. Um there are small amounts of shrub honeysuckle and bittersweet throughout the rest of the project area, but continued regular maintenance should take care of that. So, as David said, this project is
requiring the removal of 10 trees. We're going to replace these with 12 native trees in accordance with your regulations, section 5.01. Uh we are proposing to plant these trees at small sizes due to various factors including the potential lack of irrigation.
Smaller trees experience less stress during transplanting and are more successful at establishing an adverse in adverse conditions than larger ones. We're not proposing any additional shrubs or the or other plantings because
uh as I described earlier the site is pretty healthy. It has a healthy canopy layer and the tall grass meadow beneath is both valuable habitat and it's also attractive and appropriate to the site's usage as a park.
Um so again we're we're proposing 12 native trees small sizes and as for the disturbed area within the limit of work after the project that will be rad smooth and seated with a mix of native
grasses and I'm happy to answer any questions. >> Thank you. Okay, anybody have any questions? police. >> Um, having formerly been on the board of the Maronei and worrying about that tower, I think it's a a good plan and I
think the planting replacement of trees is logical and let the growth come and let people keep enjoying that walk back there. I think it's a good plan. >> Thank you. [snorts] Anybody else? >> Um, yeah. I just while you're have the equipment there, there's no plans on,
you know, putting like 10 yards of sand over the bank and shoring up the bank a little bit while you're there. It's >> not at this time. No. >> Okay. Thanks. No. >> Yeah. Um just not to quibble with your
count, but um the 10 trees on your on the removal plan um lists their DBH. And as I count that up in in accordance with the regulations, I'm getting 13. Now, I don't want to quibble about that because
I take the point that it's a really tight site and I got the point that you made. I'm just saying that if if it's not in compliance, we're going to have to say something in the order to justify that it's going to be what are you proposing? 12.
>> 12. Yes. >> Oh, yeah. Okay. So, it's only one off, but still, um, I think it's because of that 20-inch oak, which is a 3:1 required three. Um, and the 220s require two, and everything else is one. So, um,
>> if you want us to add one more small tree. >> Well, what what do you I mean, you you're the expert. Is it is it it is very heavily the canopy is healthy. Um, but are you putting them in more or less the spaces that they're
taking out those uh locusts? >> More or less, but we're arranging the cedars to provide a little screening from the parking lot. And then the other pines and oaks, we're just kind of scattering them throughout the disturbed area. >> Okay. But but you're saying I took it in
your letter that you're saying the point you're making is that because of the way the site [clears throat] is already vegetated adding more trees does not confer a net benefit and in fact it could be a a ne negative. >> Correct. The site is well canopy. >> We'll just put that in. We need to put
that statement in there to make that as a finding. Um, I would also ask that you coordinate and talk to um the friends of the triangle, the people who brought the RDA to us back in 2018. They're the ones who do all the path work. Um, just to
make sure that they're they're heard um that, you know, and how the thing is done. They're very they follow this pretty carefully. So, um, like to make sure they are they are they're a stakeholder that needs to be listened to. Thank you. Good plan.
list. Uh, anybody have anything else? >> Just a quick question. So, where's the water come from? The the water the plants >> in [laughter] >> at the uh northwest corner of the the large boat parking spaces. There is a uh
seasonal water service there for washing down boats. So, they'll be able to use work off of that for any temporary irrigation. >> Will they use those bags? And will they use those irrigation bags and fill them up there and put them by the trees so they can really How is it how is it actually going to happen? Because I know
that lack of irrigation is a real threat to this. >> Yeah, we haven't figured that out yet. >> Okay. [laughter] Town has lots to use in the park areas. So, >> that might be an option to to if you've got a water source to keep fill those bags and put them
>> Well, those only work on uh on deciduous, not so much evergreens, the bags, but >> yeah, maybe not on the evergreens. >> I was going to say the gator bags work on the deciduous trees, but they're not particularly effective for the evergreens. So, we're going to have to figure out how to get some kind of a
drip irrigation system in there working seasonally. Um that could be something as simple as for this size trees and this size site micro irrigation off a timer that can be attached to the spigot and still allow the spigot to have so people can access for water. >> You can split that spigot and really
exactly on the timer that's better for this number of trees and the the the area in which the trees are being planted. It's such a small area that would be appropriate for this. >> Okay. Okay. >> Great. Thank you. Anything else? Okay, I
think we can go to an order. How soon do you want your order? Yesterday. [laughter] >> Yeah, I mean 17th. >> That would work. >> Okay. Because we have I'm not sure
>> any orders yet for 17th. So that does work. Okay. >> I move that we continue 784 Orleans Road to the meeting on December 17th for an order of conditions. >> Second. >> Okay. Elise. >> I. >> Janet. I >> Paul. >> Hi, >> Eric. >> Hi. >> And I say I.
>> Thank you. >> 17th. You'll have it. >> Okay. Bradford. >> Next. [clears throat] Excuse me. Next up is a notice of intent for 202 Lime Hill Road, Lime Hill 22, Trust, Map 12E,
Parcel 4-B6, SC 10-3746. proposed elevated catwalk maintenance of existing path and mitigation. This is continued from October 8th, 2025. >> Yes. Good afternoon. Uh for the record,
Mark Burgess with Shorefront Consulting. Uh we have Blue Flax and u because I forgot your name and and Bill [clears throat] what's his name? >> Um okay. So we revised the plan instead of going to ZBA. We wanted to revise the
plan to include your comments and then we'll go to ZBA so that we're switching things up a bit. Uh the changes to my plan included the the the drafting uh correction for the labeling of the ladder. The I extended a cloud for the
mitigation area over to the property line. Uh the mitigation area increases from in my estimate 932 to 1217 square ft. the pile change, the pile material was changed to green heart and we added the two kayak racks to the side of the
walkway and whatever whatever rack they decide they simply bolt on to the side stringers um [clears throat] as a as the commission suggested. And then I don't know if I don't remember when I did this, but the public access stairs were removed from the walkway. I
don't know if that was in the last revision or this one. I contacted Directly, gave them the copy of the plan, and they said that public access can be allowed around the beginning of the stairs as it's labeled on the plan there. So, we don't need the extra stairs in the marsh. So, those have been
removed. That uh for the design plan, that summarizes those changes. And I'll turn it over to uh Mr. Blueax here. So, >> that would be Mike. >> Mike, I'm sorry. >> Blue. [laughter] I'm horrible with names. >> Mike Tannis from Blue Flax. So our
mitigation plan is essentially the same. Same number of shrubs in roughly the the same area. So not much has changed. The discrepancy there's a difference in the square footage and that's because we I'm
not counting the path or the stairway and I've just subtracted that. >> I'll take that. >> But yeah, I'm happy to answer any questions. Okay. Anybody want to start? >> I just wanted to ask you to repeat what
you just said. So the square footage in the path and the at grade stairs is excluded from the calculation of the mitigation area. >> Yes, my calculation of the mitigation area is a lower number because I've excluded the area. >> And what is that number then? Because
that would >> 954. >> 954 total. >> Great. That solves that question. Thank you. Anybody have any further questions? The mitigation on the east side of the stairway. Um you won't there won't be
above ground drip in the pathway, right? You're going to have to go to get to those plants on the east side of the stairway. I mean, what do you do? go underground and then so there isn't there planting also on the east side of the stairway.
>> There is >> um that was added >> as it was asked for last time. >> I can answer that. >> So we'll just run the main irrigation um pipe underneath and we'll just have it at grade. We don't want to bury it underground. And of course I know we're going to have this discussion at the end
of the at the end of the hearing today, but right now it would just basically run and be kind of located at grade and then allow for the drip on that side of the path. Thank you. Any other questions, Eric? Anybody?
Looks like you listen to us. >> I have a few things. >> Okay, good. >> So, so thank you for listening and making those changes. Um, but I continue to be had a lot of concerns about this project. Um I I know I went through it all last time about you know the
vulnerability of salt marshes, the importance of salt marshes, how our job is to protect salt marshes and to make sure that applicants go through the proper process of avoiding, minimizing and mitigating. So um I have a a concern
at the larger level about where this is and why this is but I have a number of more detailed concerns. Ah one was the mitigation area whether it was including that. So that's done. Um on the materials you are doing green heart. Um
it's a monopile. How many monopiles? >> I can tell you in a second. One, two, three, four, five. >> Five. >> They're shown there in the middle. >> 12 inch timber. Green heart. >> Um did I say 12 inch?
>> Yeah, it says 12 inch diameter. These are round. I take it. >> Yes. Um, >> no, I have 10 inch on my plan. >> Huh. >> Should be more than adequate for something like that. Like >> Okay. Well, that reduces a little bit.
That's good. >> Did you I have a question for you, Mark. Did you consider using helical piles instead of timber? Uh, no I didn't actually. But and costwise they're much more. But
>> which how much? Much more or >> they're at least 12 to $1,500 a piece to sink them. >> Mhm. >> Um, but like what do you end up with? You can't just have if you have the rod sticking up, it wiggles. So, you really need two of them to cross brace them to keep it firm. One single monopile.
>> You couldn't do a monopile, I don't think, with a helical. You wouldn't. So the the anchors are only two inch one or two inch square, >> right? Which is why they have less less propensity to disturb the the surface of the marsh, >> right? But they're bolted connections, so they'll they'll wobble and so you
need two of them and then you then you'd have to brace them. Um it's kind of six and one half does the other. You think it's at the end of the day is it roughly an equal uh impact or >> um >> I just think about a 12 in 10 in
>> thing going you know five of them is >> well like I said we're we're splitting hairs here but you can squ open up the marsh and squish it scientific term you can squish it so open up a 10-ft hole and just push it down through the pete and then actually
there's no loss of marsh it just gets compressed a little bit around the piling. Okay. So, that gets me to my next issue, which is installation. So, no jetting of any kind. There was there was some language in your original narrative that said if jetting is necessary, blah blah. And but
this is not >> Yeah, you can prohibit jetting. So, >> and we're going to prohibit jetting. >> Yeah. The um normally would little piles like this, you would just create a tripod with either a vibratory or a or a blow hammer and you you'd put the you'd
make the hole to start them. >> Yep. and then just mechanically drive them the rest of the way in. Um, somebody might say that they want to augur. So, you might I might ask you about that, but that would be like a say a six inch or if they had an 8 inch
augur, you would augur down, but then that's the dirt being removed. So, if you just want a mechanically driven, I would suggest that we just >> How far down do you go with doing that? >> That to the to the um through the through the marsh into >> until you hit the pee layer. >> Yeah. Yep.
>> And how far into the pete do these things have to go? Couple feet. >> I think I said I think I said eight feet minimum. >> Okay. So, uh, in terms of the of the um there's a strong preference, at least I have for vibratory rather than the the
bang bang hammer just because of the impacts on the the critters in the area mostly. Um, so if that's feasible, I'd like to put that in and just make sure that that's >> I I can't confirm that because we don't know which contractor is going to be
doing it. >> Um, and vibratory creates noise, too. So, >> yeah, but less it's not as you don't have that. I mean, I'm just going with what >> Yeah. >> the state says and what the Cape Cod Commission says in terms of their preferences for installations of these.
So, they know more than we do. Um, if you wanted to add a condition that said that vibratory is preferred, then that would be our first choice. But again, I don't know who is going to do it and what toys and tools they have to do it.
>> Okay. We'll put it in that is preferred and and talk about it later. >> Okay. >> Um, we will use the usual conditions about barge use. two hours before and after high tide only to keep it off the Is there eelgrass beds
>> in this? I don't think I saw any in this area. So, you're just worrying about then there's just a bottoming out on the shellfish beds if there are any. It's mapped. I don't know if there are there or not. >> [clears throat] >> There's a contractor that brings in kind of like a um well, he has a rig that he
puts on rails and he he's used it to install another another walkway to the west and it it they creates a board a board uh system to drive it over the to wheel it over the marsh. And that sometimes can be delivered by barge, but
it would just be done at the right time. And then that has the pile driver on it and he just punch the piles in, put it back on the barge and drive away. >> So it's a one day operation. >> Uh again, I don't I would say at least I'd say two because he's got five piles to drive.
>> Okay. >> But again, that depends. There's only one contractor that can do it that way. The other >> if he's available and right price and all that kind know it's complicated. >> The others will more than likely use a tripod. >> Okay.
Okay. Um [snorts] DMF had asked for an opportunity to review Blue Flax's mitigation plan. They put that in their letter. Do you know if that'sided? >> There was something in their letter saying they had not seen the mitigation
plan and they wanted to chance to review it. So >> I I don't recall I don't recall that. I don't have that letter with >> Okay. But just check with make sure that that's if that's the that's what I wrote down. So if that's the case then >> So who was that that asked for that? >> EMF. >> Oh, EMF. All right.
>> Well, they're important. >> They are. Um, [laughter] okay. Well, that's a lot of detail and and I appreciate if you take all that on board. Um, but you know, I still get
caught on this one on the opening uh need for the project and where the project is going. Um I look at your uh revised site plan and and once again I am always struck by if if that elevated
catwalk and oh it's not one and a half to it's one to one right so it's three feet minimal >> separation we will >> underlying underlying structural member. Yeah. >> Okay. So we will put um conditions for uh monitoring the vegetation underneath on an annual basis and providing
photographs and that'll be a continuing perpetual thing. um >> it's 40 feet as opposed to, you know, >> 10 or 12 feet if you had crossed in the first place. And I I I went back and looked at my notes and remembered what you had said about the complications of
people using it and I balanced that against what the state through DMF and DP express a a huge preference for when possible doing shared access devices like these or structures like these as
well as the Cape Cod Commission continually expresses its strong preference for shared all for the right reason to minimize the impact on these really vulnerable marshes. is >> um you know I balance that against uh potential possible legal complications
of people who um don't agree or you know and I think if they've worked it out in other places that could be worked out here. So I I still think it's in the wrong place. It is unnecessary unnecessary impact where it's proposed
to be. Um, at the end of the day, when I balance the difference, the the the potential danger to a marsh, the damage from people walking through it versus a catwalk, you know, and you get to that point, it's okay so long as it's done with best practices and it's properly
done and it's minimized. >> And that's the piece that's missing here, >> [snorts] >> um, is the minimization because now you have a 50- foot long pathway uh, at the bottom of the bank, at the top of the marsh. I can't imagine what the impact of that might be and a a much longer
structure. So, um >> in that we want photos too before >> you know annually. >> Absolutely. You should do that. >> Yeah. I would think that any any potential temporary impacts would be resolved in in a year or less and then
you could monitor it for three years and if it's everything's cool after three years then you know you know it's going to be fine. The other walkways that I've done easily after two at least the first season, we haven't I haven't observed any um significant negative impacts from
the from the walkway because they were well they were because they were designed and installed properly. >> But I I do I appreciate everything everything you said. We are where we are. >> Counting. I'm just I'm not going to be able to vote for this for that reason. >> So anyway,
>> anybody Elise? Um I don't know how many people uh watched or went to the select board meeting last night. Um but there was a presentation by the energy and climate um action committee on the salt marsh project that they're undergoing and have been for years and will
continue to do and I just want to stress that I think it's very important for people to pay attention to that and it was a really ominous set of predictions which a lot of times committees like that go in that direction. Um, but the
way they described what happens to a salt marsh when you do get in there and change it and put things over it so that there's not the the um the nature helping it um was pretty pretty disturbing. And salt marshes when they
get injured, if you will, migrate upland and there's not much space to go upland on all of Chadam's coast. So, just a cautionary cautionary note in my opinion and I was against the
the uh catwalk and the size of it the last time as well. I haven't decided how to vote yet. >> I I [clears throat] still have the position that continually walking over the marsh is permanent damage that doesn't have a chance to recuperate
season after season. And the result of that damage is more than any potential negative impacts from a from a properly designed and installed um elevated walkway. And we have the data to support that because of other projects that we've done. We absolutely know that
creeping through the marsh. And this one has another element of safety because of all the little potholes that are there. Um Karen and I were on the site and we had to sort of walk around them. So the the you know they they they exist in other parts of the mar of a marsh but
here there's there's several. So there's a bit of a safety issue as well but I firmly believe that if people really use that access and through the marsh it's it's permanent damage that does not get doesn't get repaired. Plus now when you're down to the the bare soil now
you've got fines running into the water from from storm uh rain rain and all of that. So all of that I see is just just bad. So we've we have a track record of being able to do this correctly and not hurt the marsh. That's the goal for both of us.
>> I look for the goal to be reached for people to share their catwalks. >> Me too. I would love that. >> Not every not everybody needs their own strip of wood to get out to the water. I think the neighborhoods and neighbors need to do better or it's just not going to be there at some point. Oh,
>> if I could if I could comment briefly. >> I've been involved with uh this form of construction for many years and the uh the reason for this awkward design is the neighbors don't get along and so you
know I have attempted to get people to cooperate and they raise issues of use insurance potential liability and it's just been uh completely unsuccessful and with respect to voting
no. Certainly, you're right. But all you have to do is go around, look at waterfront homes that don't have a catwalk, you know, and see how many of them have a path through the marsh V-shaped. >> Yeah. >> Because they start down, they start walk
down and gradually it deteriorates. So now they have a Vshape >> where there's no marsh at all. And so I would only encourage you to look at those before you think about voting no. Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Okay. Anybody have anything else? >> Okay. I think we can send this to an order. >> Um we have to go to ZBA. >> I hadn't finished. You're not before ZBA until January 8th. So I am recommending
that we hold off until the 14th. That's fine. >> Okay. >> Sorry for interrupting you. >> Nope, that's okay. >> I move that we continue 202 Lime Hill Road to the meeting on January 14th for an order of conditions.
>> Second. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Elise >> I >> Janet >> I >> Paul >> I >> Eric >> I >> and I say I. Okay Bradford the next please. Next up is a notice of intent for 86
Vineyard Avenue, Cassandra Pyers, [clears throat] map 10D, parcel 49-d92, SE10-3755, construction of two additions and a pool outside of the 100 foot buffer zone, resurface of existing driveway, and
repair and replace existing steps to the front door. >> Hi folks, good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. Dave Flareity for the applicant at 86 uh Vineyard Avenue. Um the property is located at 86 Vineyard
Avenue. Uh the property partially lies within the 100 foot buffer wetland uh resource area, but the property does not lie within any FEMA flood zone. A proposed swimming pool and two modest additions are proposed outside the 100
foot buffer zone. the this this property has been in fallen into a little bit of disrepair. So, uh part of the project is the driveways the driveway there needs to be resurfaced preferably with asphalt, but the commission may choose the materials at its discretion. The
existing egress from the driveway to the front door are temper ties and in poor shape. Uh new blue stone pavers installed by a professional are proposed for safer access. Uh a detailed representation of the BVW is on file with the conservation
commission from recent utility work that's been performed on the south side uh on Smith Street. If you notice on the plan um it says Smith Street Private Way. Uh I believe utilities were recently installed and replantings have
been accomplished there. Um and as a result it was uh SE 103719 established a pretty solid uh uh wetland delineation there which we confirmed. [snorts] Um
soil erosion uh control remains with the project as it as it is. It will not be disturbed. Uh the resource areas delineate delineated are consistent with both state and local performance standards. Um, a work limit line is proposed along
the south side of the existing driveway, then following the driveway up to the 100 foot offset. Uh, [snorts] the work limit line will then wrap around the extent of the construction area of the proposed f pool. The silt fence is proposed, but the commission may require
waddles or any other material it so desires. The work limit line will remain in place until a certificate of compliance is issued or the con or the commission deems uh acceptable. Uh staging for the projects that are
proposed will be on the north side of the property well outside the 100 foot zone. They're going to extend the driveway to accommodate the construction materials to be brought in. Again, outside the 100 foot uh buffer zone. Um, all building permits required will be
applied for during the conservation notice of intent process. It's understood that a building permit along with any corresponding swimming pool, electrical, and plumbing permits will be required. And the property is serviced by municipal sewer. So, there are no upgra upgrade requirements for a septic
system. And uh to finish, the applicant is eager to start construction and this project will move along expeditiously. Thank you. >> Thank you. All right. Anybody have any questions, comments?
Well, I I can tell you that for the um replacing of the driveway, the resurfacing, I am going to strongly ask that it not be asphalt, that it be pvious.
Um whether that be stone or shell or whatever. But since you said it's up to us, that's my feeling. Um especially since some of it is in the um NDZ. Um so that's my first thing. Um I also
have something. Bob's not here, but Bob sent uh a couple comments and he would like to see the English ivy close to the wetlands in the NDZ removed >> on the property. >> Yes.
>> Okay. >> And there's a shed in the NDZ he'd like to see removed. >> Okay. and the vegetable garden that's in the NDZ should only be organically managed
were his comments. Um, having said all that, now I'll turn it over to anybody who wants to comment. >> Um, yeah. Yeah. I I the the the driveway, um, I'm always a believer if
it's pre-existing, it should be allowed to be replaced. um the area of the driveway that may be in the NDC, do something else with it. My only concern there's a slope there. So, if it's a if it's a if it's a gravel driveway, it's just going to be a mess.
It's you're going to have the stone. >> Well, I wondered if we could have something besides the slope, the slope be some per you know. >> What about the We talked about that pvious concrete. >> Exactly. Yeah. there's >> with maybe a drain at the bottom just
because it is so it's fairly steep and if you have runoff it's going to come >> but there may not be enough time but even for a pvious concrete but that combination of pvious concrete and some kind of a drain at the at the low point >> would prevent the water from uh
channeling >> well if you have the pvious concrete I don't even think you need a drain >> I mean it feels like suspenders but I was just worrying about that about how >> but if you did a if you replaced it with a non-pervious then yeah you'd have to have probably have a drain at the bottom
but >> um anyway that's my two cents worth >> yeah I agree >> that might so is just this piece of the driveway is the only part of this project in our jurisdiction >> pretty much
>> pool is not the patio is not the additions are not yeah there's the line >> we thought it important to let you folks know that there will be some projects on this appreciate that >> that they are outside. >> But so we're not going to be we're not going to impose conditions on any of the other stuff that's at just the
>> metal work limit is is required. >> Okay. Okay. That's really um all I had was the driveway surfacing because that's all we >> that's all coming up with >> and and if I may, I'm sorry. Um, I believe the the the driveway will
probably be the last thing to get so they can get the construction equipment in there and without making a a total mess of the place. >> Are you staging in both driveways then in both areas? >> Um, I think I'm not sure what the timeline is for the for the driveway to the north, >> but initially it'll be the one from the
south >> driveway where it says on the on the norther norwesterly side of the property will be the staging area. Okay. >> For both pool and addition materials.
So, if I I don't see an issue going to an order, but I'd love to have a or need to have a new plan that would reflect that the shed will be removed and that, you know, stating that the vegetable
garden will be organically managed and that the ivy in the wetland to the NDZ from the wetland in the NDZ will be removed. Um, but that won't, you know, slow us down for doing the order.
>> Okay, understood. >> Because that's what Bob asked for. Yeah. Um, so how soon could you get that? [laughter] >> Um, I'd say within a week or two at the latest.
>> Okay. I'm just trying to figure out two weeks is the 17th which is our next and we need it before that or else we go to the 14th of January. >> Um I'll light a fire under the uh draftsman. [laughter] >> We'll get this because I know uh the
applicant's eager to begin. So um >> I get that. >> So you'll need to have a revised plan prior to the next meeting where you issue an order of conditions. Yeah, we just need it before, you know, to make sure that we've dotted our eyes and crossed our tees for the order. >> So, they have it by the 12th.
>> Yeah. >> By December 12th. >> 12th. >> That's the date. The Friday before is when we would need that. >> Okay. Then we can have a motion, please. >> I move that we continue 86 Vineyard Avenue to the meeting on December 17th
for an order of conditions. >> Second, >> Eric. Hi >> Paul. >> Hi >> Janet. Hi >> Elise. >> Hi. >> And I say I. >> All right. We'll see you on the 17th. Thank you for your time. That will be that order will be sent to you the
Monday before. So the 15th and then for your review and if there are any uh comments or anything, we usually like to receive those the next day. >> Okay. Thank you. Now, do I need to be here for the 17th or >> if you have any questions comments?
>> You can be remote. Okay, perfect. Thank you again. >> Thank you. Okay, Brad for the next, please. >> Moving on to certificates of compliance. Um, we have [clears throat] the first one for 48
Marsh View Road, Ken Brownley, map 8C, parcel S75, SE 10-3271. This was for construction for construction of an addition on the front of a single family home. Uh construction of a carport addition with retaining
wall and existing fill and parking area. Um and proposed patio in front of the house. Uh fragmitees removal and mitigation plans. Um I did go and take a look at this. It looked very great and I
did not have any concerns. >> Perfect. >> Nice project. Yep. Okay, then we can have a motion, please. If nobody has any comments. >> Yeah, I just wanted to say the mitigation's come in nice. Irrigation's been removed and
>> they're doing fine. >> Yep. >> I move that we approve the certificate of compliance for 48 Marshview Road. >> Second. >> Janet >> I. >> Elise >> I. >> Paul >> I. >> Eric >> I. >> And I say I.
>> Okay. The next please. >> Didn't want to hurry it too much. The meetings are going too fast. >> You can open the next two together. >> All right, sounds good. >> Thank you. [clears throat] >> Next is uh certificates of compliance for uh 24 Windmill Lane, Jeffrey and
Jane Chandler, map 16A, parcel H2. Uh SE 10-3283, demolition and reconstruction of a dwelling within land subject to coastal storm flowage and within a buffer zone to a coastal doom. and uh SC 10-2279
raise and remove existing single family dwelling and patio construct new family home with uh the work was never started for uh SC 10-2279 um the work for 3283
um looked great and I did not have concerns. >> Perfect. >> Good afternoon. David Clark, Clark Engineering. Um, I believe you have our asbuilt plan for the project as well as Blue Flax's report on the mitigation. I
don't think there's any outstanding issues. Um, we got all the uh irrigation out. [laughter] So, that's really good. >> So, >> we appreciate that. So, anybody have any comments,
questions? >> Another another successful project. >> Yeah, this one come out really nice. mitigation is awesome. It almost looks like it like the house was picked up and a new one was put right in its place. The >> It's all pretty It's all natural. It looks like it was when I was a kid in
that area. I mean, it's just uh really nice job. Yep. >> The plants seem to be doing well without water, so they're on their own. >> Looks good. >> All right, then we can have a motion, please. >> I move that we approve the certificates of compliance for 24 Windmill Lane.
Second, >> Eric. >> Hi, >> Paul. >> Hi, >> Janet. >> I And I say I. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Okay, Bradford. Next. >> All right. Next is a certificate of compliance for 124 Moon Cusser's Lane.
William and Elizabeth Sorenson, map 10A, parcel H2, SC 10-2905, site improvements, including driveway, footpath, and invasive species management. Uh, the applicant has requested a continuence to December 17,
2025. [snorts] [clears throat] >> Okay. >> I move that we continue 124 Mooncluster's Lane to the meeting on December 17th, 2025. >> Second. >> Second. >> Elise. >> Hi, >> Janet. >> I Paul. >> Hi, >> Eric. >> Hi.
>> And I say I >> Okay, the next please. >> Next up are the proposed changes to the Chattam Wetlands regulations. Thank you. All right. So, there is a subfolder in our meeting
for today and it has two documents. Uh these the proposed changes to the regulations. Um, what we've done is incorporated some comments uh and things that both Greg
Burman and the town attorney would like to see included. And that's that bigger um part in red. And then really what we did was the you know changing wording to from
you know minimal. Uh the reason for doing this is that we are trying very hard because we're doing pretty well and we've heard a lot of properties today and we've been able to send them to orders. Um,
so it's to hopefully close the circle of modifying the application process and making our regulations a little more robust to hopefully allow
property owners to have their projects heard and approved in a timely manner. Um, there will be another part of this that after this we approve this. I didn't
want to do it both at the same time, but I'm also I asked Bradford to look into um because Yarmouth has it. uh adding to our regulations that after a certain
number of continuences, we can recommend that they withdraw or deny because we have a property for the next meeting that has been continued like
nine times and it's from 2024. So we're trying to also stop people from needing to continue as of as many times as they are many times because they are
missing a part of their application and so that is the reason for the regulation changes. Um, we're not changing anything as far as because we're statemanded mandated, you can still hear, you know, 21 days, we're following all of that.
And of course, for continuances, the applicant has to request or approve the continuance date. So, none of that is changing. So having said that, does anybody have any questions or comments about the
proposed regulation changes? And then I'll tell you about the other document. >> Go ahead, Janet. >> So I have a I have a question in the new paragraph under five public hearings for on applications for permit.
So C public hearings may be continued as follows. One, if an application has been formally filed, staff shall place it on the next available agenda only to meet statutory deadlines is incomplete, the agenda shall note something's wrong
there. Something's missing in >> and I think perhaps it might be that shall place it on the next available agenda only to meet statutory deadlines. Period. If the application is incomplete, the agenda shall note that the
application is incomplete. Whatever fix that >> and the commission may continue the hearing to allow submission of missing information, plans and documents. Does that make sense? We can yes we can fix the verbiage and we will be
reviewing this a second time um next meeting and then hopefully be able to approve it to become effective January 1st just as our application new applications are also January 1st. So I'd like
everything to be in sync. >> This would be great. because it would be a good important step forward. >> So that that that um >> maybe was what you were talking about, but it's connected >> things that are that are continued
if if they're continued because they're incomplete. This will stop that process from happening in this and we've seen so we've already seen an improvement in um the applications that we've been receiving. They are much more complete.
We're making Crystal's done a great job of, you know, sort of checking when people come in and saying where is this and and making sure that they know that we need, you know, a mitigation plan or have you applied to ZBA and these are
all a part of what we approved last time. The checklist has been, you know, beefed up a bit. So this is more to make sure that our rags are following what we're doing and you know in the
application process and we as I said have already gone to Greg Burman and the town attorney for their approval. They've given their opinions and we've incorporated that. So we know legally we are not trying to do anything
that's uh not not allowed. Mhm. >> and can be questioned. >> Well, thank you to everybody who's been working on this. >> Paul did this. >> Paul did the um regulation modifications. So, thank you to Paul. >> Thank you, Paul.
>> Um okay, then there's a second document and that is a guidance document and this is a it's something that we can give to applicants and we'll have it on our website. So it's not part of our
regulations. It's to um help people who want to understand the process. So it's um to you know so this is not a part of the regulations but it will be something
that we will um share with anybody who is curious and needs to know and it will also be on our website. So, we will review that one as well um one more time
hopefully and uh we will have a vote to hopefully approve it at the same time because uh even though it's not part of the regulations, I think it's an important process for our property owners >> and that vote will take place on the
17th. >> Yes. Okay. >> That's what I want both. We'll do everything together. >> Okay. So, I will move after this meeting both of these documents over to the 17th for anybody who wants to modify and turn change tracking on.
>> Okay. >> All right. So, there's no need for a motion for that. So, next, please. [clears throat] >> Next up is a discussion of uh possible irrigation requirement changes.
[laughter] Good afternoon. I'm Teresa Sprag with Blue Flex Design. I have a couple of photographs that I'd like to share and one of them is actually 24 windmill which we just did this. >> Okay. >> Okay. So I just wanted to share these
photographs when we had this discussion. Um the first photograph is 24 windmill and then the second photograph is 55 Sears Point um which um we've requested the certificate of compliance and and we were waiting to have the irrigation removed. And so the reason that I wanted
to show this and and also it applies to the discussion that we had today about um the Maronei site. So, when I first started doing this 15 years ago, our irrigation for these mitigation plantings was basically a couple of towers um with a spigot and a timer set
from the Ace Hardware store and we'd set up a few of these um a few of these towers with a you know in the we'd get this overhead water and that was about it. That was all we had to do. And as these projects have become more and more complicated and more and more mitigation
is required and we're also dealing with um greater stresses in the form of drought, um we've now switched our irrigation requirements. So when we do a mitigation planting, we require that all homeowners have drip irrigation for all
of their woody vegetation. trees have to be wrapped and um shrubs have to have irrigation snaked through so that they're receiving an adequate amount of water to get the roots established during the first three growing seasons. Um and so what this really requires is
that an irrigation system, not the old micro drip that we used in days of old or the towers or the spigot that we could, you know, we could set an ace hardware timer on a spigot. These are full irrigation systems. Now, in Chadam, since regulations for irrigation have changed, they also require a well
installation. So, homeowners are being required to put in a well. They're being required to put in irrigation boxes and timers and literally miles of drip piping, which we then tear out and take to the landfill.
Then the other thing that we have to that we've been considering recently is how our weather patterns are changing as we face um climate change and the fact that we do now have extended periods of drought. We're still in a level two drought. It's taking longer and longer
to make sure that plants are adequately established. Particularly on sites like 24 windmill where we're basically in a dune um and we've got pure sand. Um it was incredibly difficult to get plants established on that site even with drip irrigation because there was absolutely
no water pressure down there for us to do that and we were working off um the town water. It was when we installed that it was prior to the um ban for irrigation on town water. So, I'm trying to come to um I I'm really trying to find a solution and that's why I'm
asking for this discussion to work with you because um I'm concerned about removing all of this irrigation. I'm concerned about um you know, miles of piping going to a landfill, although David Clark just told me he'd take some and use it up in his property up in
Maine. So, we're going to pass some of that on to him. and we can reuse some of it, but to get this out, oftentimes we're just cutting our way through to get it all out. The plants have all grown in. Um, and so I'm wondering if there's a better solution for this. The
other thing that's also, you know, more and more is is this this these irrigation systems are costing thousands of dollars to install. It's costing the home homeowners, you know, literally thousands of dollars. Um, and
I feel better about having the backup of being able to have these irrigation systems in place if we go through an extended drought period rather than losing half of our plants that are moderately established. Um, so I'm not quite sure. I just wanted to have an open discussion um and see if there's
some way we could I know it would be incredibly difficult to regulate and monitor. But if we have these on a separate zone that can be turned off and perhaps even disconnected at the timer or at the irrigation box versus tearing all of this piping out, then we also get
into that discussion of whether or not we're going to leave plastic in the landscape because that's what our piping is. So it's a conundrum >> and also this the water source is still that it's still the sole source some sort of relief >> from the town's requirement and it is it
bylaw where where is this requirement >> from that irrigation systems cannot be connected to town water. You know, I listened to the zoning board two weeks ago when they were doing the >> the affordable housing project, and
there's a lot of mitigation going in there because they're taking out trees and they're putting in new trees. And at the end of the day, the zoning board required that they put in a well >> for for the irrigation for all of those. Um, and a lot of the zoning members were
a gasast, saying, "But we've got we're in a drought. How can we be saying that you know and it's that same problem of how do you keep these alive >> right >> minimizing but they did they did at the end they they couldn't connect to town water because there's this prohibition on connecting irrigation systems even
tempor there's no temporary exception >> correct in somehow because it seems to me that going to the expense of putting in a well >> for two or three years >> yes >> um is is um doesn't doesn't solve the problem. It just creates a whole new
problem. But I'm with you on what you do about all of this. And >> um yeah, >> you know, go back to the towers. No, [laughter] >> I mean the problem is is that again, you know, we warranty our plants and and
with the drought situation with overhead watering and the winds that we have here, it's just not an efficient way of watering. It's it's it's not an appropriate way of watering woody vegetation. So that's why we do require the drip irrigation for the woody vegetation for the warranty. Some
homeowners choose not to to do that and they say, "Well, we'll take our chances and we'll spend that money investing in planting new plants." And then sometimes we're out there replacing plants two or three times before we're coming to you for a certificate of compliance. Um so
you know, we'd prefer to have a lower mortality rate. Generally with the drip irrigation, we we have far less than 10% mortality on these sites. Um unless there's a plant that's just not happy in a particular site. >> Really good. That's way better. Come to
my house, fix my garden. >> Yeah. So um again, I just wanted to put this out there. I don't think we're going to come to any solution. Um >> not today. >> Not today. But just wanted to put this out there for discussion. I don't know if there are other um if there are other
um consultants on the call, maybe not. Or if you've heard this concern from other consultants um but >> just wanted to kind of put something on the table for future thoughts. >> It certainly it certainly um causes one to think about where these
mitigation areas are located. >> Yes. >> And that maybe there's a smarter way. I mean, we we we do push as as we should to keep them as close to the resource areas, but sometimes that's the farthest, the most difficult to get to, which ends up in these miles of of uh
plastic that is either permanently in the ground or is cut up and sent to the landfill, which is the bigger environmental dam. I don't know. >> I I know it's it is it's challenging. And the one thing that I can say about irrigation systems in permanent and these are just even for traditional landscapes in upland areas is that they
are far superior to what we were dealing with 15 or 20 years ago. Not only with the rain sensors, the rainbird um but also with soil moisture sensors that operate directly off of your phone. Um so there there's you know with technology we've come a long way. We
still are dealing with the with the plastic in the ground, but what we're not dealing with is the the irrigation running while it's pouring outside and running off into the street and down into the um >> Well, unless you're one of those homeowners who has it set on a timer no matter what.
>> And they have it running during downpours and they have it running during snowstorms and >> Yes. >> What is wrong with >> But I think I think most of these systems can even be retrofitted. new systems certainly can be installed using mo soil moisture sensors and I think
older systems can be retrofitted um to to support that. Again, probably a lot of those systems that we see running are not in jurisdictional areas. They're not in buffer zones. The thing that I like about the soil moisture sensors is it doesn't matter if it hasn't rained for two weeks. If the soil is moist, the
irrigation's not running. And so that's doesn't solve the problem of the um of the plastic, but it does at least solve the problem of watering when it's not appropriate. >> Well, maybe the thing to do is to start thinking about all of these problems >> in some sort of hierarch hierarchy.
>> You know, maybe not so much about how environmentally important they are, although that would be ideal, but how easy they are to be solved and start with right >> the ones that that can be solved more easily and then work your way through it. >> Yes. Um, I mean, I think it's going to be an ongoing conversation and project.
>> Okay. I'd like to get together then with some of the irrigation contractors that we use and sort of see from their perspective again, like would keeping a system in place with a soil moisture sensor be a better solution than us tearing all of this out. So that way the
irrigation is available in an extended drought period in year four if we need it. So, okay, >> Eric, do you have comments? Well, you know, I' I've I've been in the landscape maintenance business and I p primarily worked in Chadam and it was a pretty goodized company and
this is scenario how it works in the spring. They they they're here seasonal. They don't come until the end of the spring. Uh they call up the landscaper, get the place cleaned up, pool fired up, and and the fertilizing company fired up. The irrigation, everybody is in a
hurry. The irrigation company has hundreds of places to turn on. >> They turn the system on. They don't look to see whether the this rain sensor or soil sensor is actually working. The homeowner doesn't want to bother looking on their phone to see whether the
moisturizer is working or this is going. They they got other things to worry about. It's it's a nightmare. There's very limited labor. the the the the the employees, whether they're from the irrigation, they don't they're they're gonna they're there to you try to tell them to do something. You'll be lucky
that they adjust the heads and make sure they're covering everything. They're under the gun. They turn the system on >> and that's the end of it. And all you got to do is walk down I mean ride down the roads uh in the rain and see all these systems going. >> These these sensors is a feel-good
moment when you have the irrigation installed. They say, "Hey, do you want to have the, you know, the sensors?" And, you know, makes you feel good. You, oh, yes. You know, it's it helps. It's helping the environment. Um, please install it for the extra money. They last a while, but no one really knows
whether they're working or they're not working. And the homeowner is not going to come home and oh well, it's raining today, so I'm going to have less out. They don't have time for all that. They're worried about what what they're going to do for the day. Um the the this
the you know the idea is to try to plant things that don't need a lot of water because this is only going to get worse. The water issue is not going to get better and the the well sucks from the same place that anything else sucks from down below the ground. Um the um you
know it is trash left in a in an area that's supposed to be left in a natural state. Um I if if if water's becoming a major issue, if you if you can't get things established in three years, then maybe change what you put in. Uh maybe
more beach grass or things that don't need so much water. >> Um you know, can be understood from us. Doesn't have to be, you know, plants everywhere. >> Um >> but that's kind of how the scenario goes. Uh
um and you know so you you know you you take the uh you take the uh the the irrigation piping out and yes you got to throw it away unfortunately. Maybe um you don't have to wrap them so much. I I
I don't know. Um but uh again you know this is all about power and control. It's a constant struggle with, you know, I was on this committee what, 20 years ago, right? Things were much different then. >> Um, than it is now. And pretty much what
I see is this board pretty much figures out a way to to write up every situation that comes before it. So now we're we're into a power struggle on. So really what you have a you're
basically you're getting a continuence of someone's garden. So they have a formal area. They have a you know I feel more sorry for people that didn't do mitigation to get something else. I mean this wasn't normally this isn't something out of the kindness of their
heart. They did this to get this which made everybody whole. right now. I have more sympathy for some very seldom. Some they get people that come in and they and they say, "Okay, I want to do a restoration out of the kindness of my heart and they didn't do a an addition or anything on their property." But you
can't we couldn't say, "Hey, uh you know, because they did this and they can have the because it would be too hard to regulate." Then in my head saying, "Well, do you have two separate boxes? one for your one for your uh you know your mitigation area and one box for
your uh your formal area. Um you know um but it it's it it really should be brought back to its natural state because once you leave the irrigation in then it causes more mana more human
interaction in an area that's supposed to be na natural when you're finished. So, say the irrigation has to be fixed and you got to go and you you got to dig this up and if it's buried underneath, how do you know if there's a leak? You don't even know. So, it's running and
running and running and and uh uh I I I have a really hard time with this. Um I know it costs more money to remove this. Uh you know, I don't want to say it, but who's to say that the homeowner doesn't redo after the COC? I mean, we don't have drones going around in the area if
the homeowner goes and hooks it back up again and and breathe irrigates. I mean, that would be up to them and their and and and their savior. Uh but um you know, I I just I think it's just, you know, the conservation commission has to
have something. I mean, we're already getting in the catwalks and this and that. I mean, it just has to have something that it has to I I understand the pain. I have land bordering all this and I you know I keep it in natural um and at land that I have but the uh I
just it's just too much man. It's just too much. It has to be brought back to its natural state and change the plants that you put in that don't require a lot of water because it's only going to get worse. I mean look at other parts of the country that put they're putting cactuses in the front yard. I mean you know you just got to change the way you
do things. You know >> I think you're I I really what you just said really resonates in terms of you know so we require native plants but there's a whole hierarchy among them and maybe drought tolerance should be at the top of our list so that >> especially in sandy areas
>> in sandy yeah so that the less water they need to start with the better and then you can naturalize maybe more quickly >> I know that windmill is an odd case but in most of these applications we have it's already a formal house and they have a so they I've seen what they do I
we overlook it they have the heads can adjust from, you know, 180 360 very quickly and it's mostly connected with an existing uh property. So, they already got the well and they're adding something and they're adding a mitigation. This is so rare that that they would have to put a well in for a a
mitigation project. Um, those are the projects that maybe you might want to consider having overhead temporarily like beach grass or something simple uh in a sandy area rather than trying to put plants in uh that are tough to get going, you know. Anyway, that I think
it's just it's murky water here. That's it. Thanks. >> I will say that I have the rain sensor. >> Yeah, me too. and noticed a couple years ago mine wasn't working and I couldn't figure it out. Well, rabbit had eaten through the wire, >> right?
>> So, that also happens and then somebody an owner thinks, "Oh, I have a rain sensor and it >> they don't really like me. My [clears throat] sensor doesn't work, but I'm I'm here year round, so I regulate anyway. I might, you know, five minutes. >> I didn't even turn mine on. >> I'm always constantly adjusting. And
who's going to hire the person that comes around and constantly adjusts these things? Uh it's just not going to happen. They turn it on and then when the homeowner comes home in the summer when it's dry, they when it's drier, they call up the irrigation company, crank her up, you know, more water because it's dry.
>> Uh and the the abuse that I've seen in my years, man, I I couldn't they just they're not really there to the homeowners don't want to get into all this stuff, you know? They're thinking that they're hiring the company to take care of it and there's shortage of
labor. It's it's just a fiasco, man, to to get all this done. It really is. I >> That gets back to to what Teresa was saying. Maybe the next thing is to have a conversation and bring in the irrigation companies as well as the restoration and landscape companies for
a larger conversation about, you know, how how do we tackle this problem? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I mean, and I don't disagree with anything. >> I think you're right about it's up to, you know, they don't care. >> But the owners of the irrigation companies don't don't always at your property that they're going to send employees and some of the employees are
there. They know how to turn it on. They know how to run it. They know how to get it fired up and then they move on to the next house very quickly cuz they're under the gun. You got really, >> you know, you got like 30 days, 60 days the most to get all these properties fired up. And uh and man, it it is
getting to be quite something in Chattam to get all these properties fired up. Um >> I agree. >> Yep. >> Yeah. And I just to add to to the conversation as far as the drought tolerance when we're designing, we are always thinking about the appropriate
plant for the appropriate conditions. I mean, we're having trouble these days getting beach plum and bay berry, like our our two standard back dune species that grow in pure sand established. Um, and one of the reasons is, and I know, um, you you're aware of this is, you
know, when we when we're bringing plantings in from the nursery, they've been, you know, running on Miracle Grow the whole time and they're getting watered three times a day and they're getting a dose of Miracle Grow. So, we have to wean them off of that >> and they go through a shock period and they look terrible and you know they and homeowners are, "Oh my gosh, my plant
died. You need to replace my plant." We're cutting into them and saying, "No, they're green. They're going to they're going to regenerate. We just need to give them a little time." So, there is this is a huge balance that we're talking about. And I agree with you 100%. So, we're balancing the irrigation that we need to get them off that
artificial life support that they've been sitting on in the nursery when they've been in the black pot, you know, lining up with thousands of other plants and then getting them into the landscape where they're like facing, you know, pure sand and wind and no fertilizer and they they they're going to go through a shock period.
>> Oh, maybe we could do four years or something. They add an extra year. >> I mean, but >> yeah, you can't do that by regulations and all that. >> Well, no. Well, I mean, we can modify regulations, but still quite quite a while. >> Yeah. >> And and a lot of times, too, when we're
doing these restoration projects, this this is another, you know, concern is that when we're doing invasive species removal, we're not planting for a full season after we do invasive. So, so now we're already running into requesting extensions, which we currently don't have to do because the state has already
done it for us for the 23 to 25, but we'll be back in that, you know, again, looking for an extension to keep the irrigation on one more year. And a lot of homeowners, as you I'm sure, are aware and not offended by just want to get this closed out and say, you know, move on with their lives. So, yes. So,
it just again, I was just hoping to have a broader discussion. No solutions. I agree the plastic is huge. like there's nothing we can do about the piping is plastic. So there's, you know, I don't think there's any um biodegradable irrigation [laughter] coming down the pipeline, but if somebody thinks one up,
I mean, maybe we got to start working on that. >> So I think this is a it's a valuable discussion that we need to keep having. And um I'm wondering if we could schedule a second time for discussing it for February 11th because that will be
after the new year and >> we've dealt with the other regulations and things. Um >> and maybe could you see if some irrigation people could possibly be here? >> Yes, absolutely. >> I I think does everybody agree? I think that's
>> maybe we could find out if other conservation commissions >> well I think that's that gives us the time a couple months a month and a half to research and then >> information >> you know have a a further discussion and
figure out start to figure out what if anything we want to do. >> Okay, that sounds great. So yes, February 11th. >> So February 11th. So we will table this until fe February 11th, but I appreciate you bringing it to us. >> Great. Thank you. >> As it is a valuable discussion we need
to have. >> Thank you very much. I really appreciate your time. Thank you. >> Yeah. >> Okay, Bradford. On to the next. >> Next would [cough and clears throat] be the approval of the minutes for September 24th, October 8th, October
22nd, November 5th, and November 12th. >> No, not November 12th. She took that off the agenda. She did not have that one ready. >> Never meant. >> Oh, good. Okay. Because I saw that it's missing. >> Yeah, but it was missing. And I said to her, "Where is it?" And she said, "Oh, I meant I took it off, but I think some
didn't either." That Well, it's off on my agenda. >> So, um, we could do September 24th and November 5th together. >> Okay? because everybody
>> everybody who's here attended those. >> Okay, >> good. [laughter] >> So, let's start with those, which would be September 24th or November 5th. If anybody has any modifications to
those, >> speak now. >> I did not all >> I I went through them. I made modifications to a couple things, small things, and that was it. >> Yeah. So if nobody has any modifications to those two, we could have no September
24th and November 5th together. >> All right. I move that we approve the minutes from September 24th, 2025 and November 5th, 2025. >> Second. >> Eric >> I >> Paul >> I >> Janet >> I and I say I. Okay. October 8th, I was
not present. So, that one I will abstain. But everybody else, if you have any modifications to that one, >> made it. >> Karen, are we talking October 8th? >> Yep. >> Yes. >> It says, "Chair Karen Latin called the
hybrid meeting to order." >> Oops. Okay. I missed that. >> Me, too. >> Me, too. >> That's because it was about you. Actually, what it is is I didn't read that part because I go to who was present and present and then I go down
from there. So, thank you. >> So, um that's been modified >> and updated. Uh anything else? Thank you for catching that. >> I move that we approve the minutes from October 8th, 2025.
>> Second. >> Uh Eric, >> I >> Paul, >> I >> Janet. I >> Elise >> I >> and I abstain. So that's approved. Okay. The next one, Janet, you weren't y present. So October 22nd, anybody have
any modifications? Um Bob gave me a small modification which I fixed for him >> um just a little while ago that um just changed the verbiage in 196 Orleans a little bit.
Um, other than that, there were no I, you know, I made changes a while ago. All I did was I changed um the sentence. Bob asked that only native plants be used to screen the generator is the way
he wanted it written. So, I I put that in. So, anybody have anything else? >> Okay, we can have a motion. I move that we approve the minutes from October 22nd, 2025. >> Second. >> Eric, >> I
>> Janet abstain. >> Elise, >> I. >> And I say I. So that's approved. Um, so we're all set. >> Yay. >> Bradford. >> I guess. Well, actually, we have to do it. [laughter] >> I move that we adjourn the hearing. >> Second.
>> Okay. Eric. >> Hi. >> Paul. >> Hi. >> Elise. >> Hi. >> Uh, Janet, I'm here. Hi. [laughter] And I say hi. Yay. We're done. Hey. Uh, hello. You guys are still on
mic. You guys are still