Heat. Heat. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. N. Heat. Heat. Hey, hey, hey. This is a hearing of the CH Conservation Commission being held on January 14th, 2026 in accordance with the
Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act and the Town of Cadam Wetlands Protection bylaw and regulations. My name is Karen Latman and I serve as the chair. Please note this meeting is being recorded and will be available shortly at hereafter for scheduled or and on
demand viewing on any smartphone or tablet device. If anyone else is recording the meeting, including the use of AI note takingaking apps, please notify the chair. Pursuant to Governor Healey's March 28, 2025 signing of
chapter 2 of the acts of 2025 extending certain COVID 19 measures adopted during the state of emergency suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law GLC 30A
20 until June 30th, 2027. This meeting of the Chattam Conservation Commission is being conducted in person and via remote participation. Every effort will be made to ensure that the public can ex adequately access
the proceedings as provided for in the order. A reminder that persons who would like to listen to this meeting while in progress may do so by calling the phone number 1508-9454410. conference ID
486684710 pound or join the meeting online via Microsoft Teams through the link in the posted agenda. While this is a live broadcast and simal cast on Cham TV Exfinity channel 1072,
despite our best efforts, we may not be able to provide real time access. We will post a record of this meeting on the town's website as soon as possible. Today's hearing is being conducted in person, by phone, and by video
conference. The agenda, instructions on how to attend, and copies of documents for review or post 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 are attending by phone, you can mute and unmute by using star six. If you are online and you are not a commissioner, please keep your camera turned off unless you have been recognized. Indicate you 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. >> Jet Williams present. >> Elise Gordon >> present. Eric Hilbert is not here. Bob Delvecio >> present. >> And I'm here. So we've established we
have a quorum. Is there anyone who would like to make any announcements, comments, or future agenda items for anything other than the properties on the agenda today? You may comment on those when the property is being heard.
Anybody? Okay. >> What? >> Sorry. Future agenda items. >> Future agenda items. And then please identify yourself for the record. >> Gloria Hicks, South Chadam. and I wanted to know if you could put on the agenda
to talk about twine fields and the protection of that conservation area. Um there is a development going in there. Um the ZBA right now and Penrose are working out major details, but regardless of what happens that is designated for affordable housing um no
matter who develops it. Um right now currently there are two accesses from the development as planned going to Twine Fields. Um and that's a concern because um the ZBA chair uh those of you that watched the meeting or heard the meeting um it has been treated as an
amenity and it's not. We have very little conservation land in South Chattam. >> Um and the other thing is I don't know if you look into or if there needs to be any kind of input by you in terms of the development in that ravine. I don't know if you've seen the topography. The only
thing that would if it came before us, if there's any wetlands that they're trying to do any work within 100 feet of that >> would be our jurisdiction. Um, we are aware of this. Um, it was part of our discussion
>> in our premeating yesterday. Um, so we will, you know, uh, keep an eye on it. >> Okay. And if um our agents feel that um there is something that we need to contribute to it but it is conservation
foundation property, >> right? >> So it is already protected. >> Okay. >> By them. >> Okay. All right. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Um >> Madam Chair, can I just comment? Go ahead. >> Yeah. it it's actually owned by the town
and there's a conservation restriction on it that the CCF holds um and we enforce and we are well aware of um that restriction and certainly be amenable to whatever you decide to do about putting it on the agenda.
>> Okay, we will um maybe we could put that we'll figure out a date for that to go on the agenda. Um thank you Paul. Before we begin the agenda, Bradford, are there any announcements for any requests for continuances today?
>> Yes, there are two uh requests for continuances. The first is the order of conditions for 22 Lime Hill Road. Um they've requested a continuence to February 25th, 2026.
And the field change request for uh 1557 Bridge Street. Um they've requested a continuence to January 28th, 2026. >> Great. Thank you. Um at this point, Bradford Bower, Cham's
assistant conservation agent, will now lead us through the agenda. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Um we'll start with a requested order of conditions. The first one is 22 Lime Hill Road 22
Lime Hill 22 Trust map 12E parcel 4-B6 SC 10-3746 proposed elevated catwalk maintenance of existing path and mitigation. Um as I said the applicant has requested a continuence to February 25th 2026.
>> Great. If we could have a motion please for Lime Hill. I move that we continue 202 Lime Hill Road to the meeting on February 25th, 2026. >> Oh, I need somebody to second. >> Second.
>> Oops. Thank you. All right. Elise >> I. >> Janet. >> I Paul. >> Hi, >> Bob. >> Hi. >> And I say I. >> Thank you. Next. B. Uh, Bradford. >> Next up is an order for 18 Old Warf Road. Russell and Jennifer Herden.
Map 16 I parcel 9 SE 10-3756 construction of a garage addition within the buffer zone to a vegetated wetland. >> Good afternoon David Clark clerk engineering on behalf of the herdens. Um the way we left it at the last meeting
uh Katrine was to make some three changes to the plan. Believe she's done that and >> yes >> she's she can't make the meeting today but I doubt that you have questions on the changes because they're straightforward. And did you have an opportunity to read the order?
>> Yep. Um, everything's fine except you got two conditions in there about a revetment. This is an inland resource area. So, uh, I don't think it's necessary to have a >> in the special conditions. We have >> the special conditions. Yeah. On the
last page, um, uh, 11 and 12, uh, which would be under section D. Oh, okay. >> Standard conditions. >> Yeah, standard conditions. Okay, >> that's it. >> All right, we will get those removed.
>> Did you have you found them or do you want me to take them out later? >> No, I just removed them. But it does say if applicable to the project. >> Right. So, >> exactly. All right. If we could have a motion, please. >> I just wanted to make a comment. >> I'm sorry. >> It's okay. Um, Katrine's not here, but
um, so I I was taken by Eric's comment at the at the hearing that he had planted those that row of arborite, the five of them along the the property line there. And um, so I got curious about, you know, they are at least, I don't know, 20 25
maybe feet high. And I thought that Katrine had said that they were going to be cut down to about five feet. So I did just a little bit of reading enough to be dangerous. I'm no expert in Bartlett trees is but what I read was that with arborite you can't cut too much without
really damaging and and danger endangering the life of the tree. So we put in the condition that any trimming has to be done in accordance with best practices. >> So but without specifying what the how much they can take off. Um but I think
that just needs to be really mindful that that's a it's a it's a multi-year process to bring them down. um not just lap them. Will you Bradford are you? >> Yeah, if I may, Madam Chair. Um I spoke to Katrina about that and her intention
was to reduce the height by 5 to 8 ft. >> That's and I I put that in there by 5 to 8 feet, not to 5 to 8 feet, which I thought that she had. >> Yeah. After the meeting, the homeowner was thought that there was uh not a
clear understanding about what was being asked because uh >> he presented to his neighbors that the height was only going to be reduced by 3 to 5 feet. Okay. >> Eric said, "Well, maybe eight." And that's where I think it kind of got off track and >> it did. >> It it might have seemed that we were
going to cut them down to 3 to 5t. >> It that certainly not. And and I talked to Katrine the next day and she goes, "Absolutely not. We're we're reducing the height. >> Okay. I just wanted to double check that because and double check that she had no problem with the language in the order
that they'll be cut by 5 to8 and in accordance with best practices and blah blah blah. Okay. >> Just wanted to >> Okay. I I did uh I did add a special condition at the end. I don't know if you were able to see it, David. Any plants planted around the new garage shall be
approved by the conservation agent. Yeah, they they were plann that question was asked at the meeting and I had asked the the owners prior to were they planning anything and they they said absolutely not. They didn't want to maintain any vegetation around that but they can live with that condition.
>> Sure. Terrific. Thank you. >> Sorry Bob. >> That's okay. >> I move that I move that we close the hearing on 18 Old Warf Road and approve the order of conditions as modified. >> Second. >> Okay. Elise >> I. Janet I >> Paul >> I
>> Bob >> I >> and I say I >> thank you. >> Thank you. Okay. The next please. >> Next up is an order of conditions for 20 L Street. Uh Karen Loco
map 10F parcel R9 SC10-3730 removal and replacement of pond access stairs. >> Good afternoon. Mike Tannis from Blue Flag Design. We reviewed the draft order and we just have one small comment in
the finding section under number nine. It references an increase in the NDZ when there according to finding one there is none. So it's just a little bit of conflicting language there but other than that we have no comments.
>> Is there any work happening in the NDZ? >> There is the elevated stairway is being built. >> Okay. That's why it's in there. So, what we just need to do is remove that it's an increase maybe say work being done in
the NDZ >> because that's why it's in there because there is something happening. It's just not a Sorry, I didn't catch that when I wrote it. >> That's fine. >> Um, anybody else? Bob, do you have anything?
Yeah, I think uh special condition number five is I don't know if it's necessary. There isn't really a patio going in or anything like that. >> I think it's because it's walkways, patios, driveways, and
there's walkways. That's why I left it in. I don't know if that's correct or not, but I struggled with that one. >> What What kind of a walkway is it? But uh I thought it was just steps down to the uh >> Yeah, >> it is steps down and then above the
elevated stairway there are some >> ingrounders to help >> probably not applicable. Yeah, probably not applicable because it's stone in between the uh the steps. >> Correct. >> So,
>> okay. >> Yep. I, as I said, I struggled trying to >> I saw it and said >> and went, well, wait, we do have pathways, but >> thank you. >> Thank you for bringing that up. >> Sure. >> Anybody anything else?
Okay, then we could have a motion, please. >> I move that we close the hearing on 20 L Street and approve the order of conditions as written. >> Second, >> Elise. I >> Janet. Hi, >> Paul. I >> Bob >> I
>> and I say I. Okay. Next, Bradford, please. >> Next up is a field change request for 1557 Bridge Street Eastward Companies map 15B, parcel 1B, I see 10-3452.
Uh demo two existing dwellings in a pool. Reconstruct both dwellings. field change request is to change the orientation of the pool and reconfigure the patio area. Um the applicant has requested a continuence to January 28th,
2026. >> I move that we continue 1557 Bridge Street to the meeting on January 28th, 2026. >> Second. >> Elise >> I. >> Janet I. >> Paul >> I. >> Bob. >> I. >> And I say I.
>> Okay. Next. Moving right along. Um, would you like me to read the next two in together? >> Uh, yes, please. >> Okay. Next up, we have uh two notice of intents for uh the first one is 53
Little Beach Road, Monomorey Rips LLC, map 16A, parcel H50, I see 10-3747, uh for demolition of an existing dwelling and construction of new dwelling within land subject to coastal
storm flowage and 47 Little Beach Road, Monomoy Rips LLC, map 16A, parcel H52. two SC 10-3737 again for the demolition of an existing dwelling and construction of new
dwelling and title 5 subsurface sewage system within land subject to coastal storm flowage. >> So, uh we've been to ZBA for the second time. Um number 47 was approved. Um so
we would ask that that one get closed. um 53. Uh we just got the revised footprints yesterday. We're able to get a plan out this morning to file with ZBA because they're being heard next Thursday and uh we've also filed eight
copies upstairs. Uh so 53 should be continued obviously till probably January 28th if there's room on the agenda. No, >> I ask a question,
>> please. So, I know it made sense for the longest time to keep these two together, but if if 47 is ready to go, should we consider separating them and going moving ahead with an order for that and waiting? >> We filed them separately, so there's see numbers in individual ones for both
properties. So, you can close 47. You don't see any further changes happening at 47? >> No. >> No matter what happens at 57. >> No matter what happens. >> Okay. Okay. >> The shared septic system was approved last night at the board of health. So that portion of the project is now has a
permit. Well, it's been approved at least. >> Okay. Does anybody else have any questions, comments on either property? No. Then I think we can have two
motions. You want uh 53 continued to the 28th? >> Yes. >> And then you want 47. We could do an order. We could do it for the 28th or we could go into February. That's up to
you. >> Um it' be February 11th or 25th. >> February 11th. Okay. >> Okay. I move that we continue 47 Little Beach Road to the meeting on February
11th, 2026 for an order of conditions. >> Which one did you just say? >> 47. >> Okay. Just wanted to make sure. >> Second. >> Okay. Elise >> I. >> Janet. >> I. >> Paul. >> I. >> Bob. >> I. >> And I say I. >> And then I continue. I move that we
continue 53 Little Beach Road to the meeting on January 28th, 2026. >> Second. >> Uh Elise >> I >> Janet >> I >> Paul >> I >> Bob >> I >> and I say I
>> thank you. >> Okay, Bradford. Next up is a notice of intent for 196 Shore Road, John Swinsson, map 16E, parcel 3, SC 10-3754,
installation of a title pump chamber, force main, and generator within the buffer zone to a coastal bank. >> David Clark, Clark Engineering again. Um, so this one also was approved by zoning board appeals. Um it was the generator that required a special permit
being um a few feet from the flood plane. Um so that was approved last week. Um so there won't be any changes to the portions of your pro the project that are within your jurisdiction. >> Okay. And
there are no changes since we last heard it. Correct. I didn't see any thing come in. Uh Bob, anything? Uh just like we talked about the last time, David, you're you're not uh you're okay with uh
putting some negatives around the um >> the pump. Uh what is it? The controls and the alarm for the pump. >> We don't have a problem with that. >> Yeah. Okay. Thank you. That's all I had.
Anybody else? Okay. I think then we can go to an order for that. Well, we are just moving right along. What when would you like that? >> Um, if you have like have room on the 28th, that would be great. Uh, if not 11th is
fine, too. >> We have room if that's what you want. >> Yep, that'll work. >> Okay. Thank you for >> I move that we continue 196 Shore Road to the meeting on January 27th 20 28th
2026 for an order of conditions. >> Second Elise >> I >> Janet I >> Paul >> I >> Bob >> I >> and I say I >> thank you. >> Next please. Bradford. Next is a notice of intent for
620 Orleans Road, Sandra Shapiro, map 12J, parcel 10, parcel 19-10. Uh, we don't have a D number for this one yet. Um, but it is for Fragmitees Management.
>> Okay. >> Hi, Jessica Kent from Timothy Kent Landscape. Timothy Kent here. Um it's a notice of intent to um just do like a basic cut and swipe of invasive fragmitees. It's within the wetland, but um
yeah. Okay. Uh anybody have any questions, comments? Go ahead, Janet. Um, so on the site plan, uh, it's not
indicated where the area is where the fragmitees is located that's going to be treated. Can you >> at least I couldn't find anything. >> No, it's not. And that was one of the things I was going to ask for is I should have highlighted. We we need it
on the plan reflected where you'll be working because when we check it later on if for a COC we need to know what areas been worked. >> Okay. >> So would you want me to recopy them like highlighted on the plan and then give
you another eight copies of that? >> Yes. Um, but that doesn't stop us from being able to move forward as long as you would get it in before the next time we do anything. >> Sure. >> Um, can I add one thing? >> Anything else?
>> Yeah, a couple things. So, this is pretty unusual. Um, we don't often get Fragmitees treatment um, proposals, so it's both exciting and a little a little nerve-wracking at the same time. So, um, because we don't get to see it, I just wanted to double check a couple of
things. So all of the application is swiping by hand. >> Yeah. >> After the cutting, >> it all together, swipe it. >> So you indicated two cutings, one in July and one in the in the fall. And that's a little different from everything we've ever seen about about fragmitees, which always says do it in
the in the very late summer, early fall. So what does the July cut get you? >> But that was the late summer one. >> Oh, okay. >> And the early fall would be September probably. >> So in both cases, you cut and swipe. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> And then you cut again in the fall and swipe it again.
>> Okay. And I assume that that's going to be glyphosate. >> Yes. >> That you're going to use. Is there any particular formulation of it um that's appropriate for the marine environment where this is >> rodeo? >> Yeah. Rodeo. Is that the one you're going to do? Okay.
Okay. Um and then so it's a multi-year process. >> Yes. The client's aware of it. She >> So each year you're going to have to mow. Do you treat again after each cutting? Y >> depending on Okay, so >> rough what is your estimate for how many how long this is going to take?
>> Take a few years. It could take it's not just a one and done and and the client's quite aware of it and she's happy to do it. So >> So it's hard to say what the what the outcome is that we're looking for and by a date, you know, by a
>> yes three year period. So, we would maybe make it a continuing condition in the order that you continue to cut and swipe until um you can produce some kind of documentation showing that it's been eradicated. Please follow, you know,
>> and I know that there's some neighbors that, you know, not everyone's doing the same thing, but >> if she really wants to take care of that space and >> that's going to be another challenge. Um, one thing that we but you know because of the ryomes, but at least having um a cut down to the ground strip
around the treatment area >> will prevent them from jumping over on the surface. You can't do anything about the underground movement, but at least it'll it'll delineate this area as being treated and to try to keep the the bad boys out. Yeah. On the other sides. Okay.
>> Um Okay. >> Yep. >> That's it. Thank you very much. Okay. >> Good luck. Boy, >> I' I'd like to see you in your project narrative rather than saying July 2026 and September to October 2026 to not
specify the you know late summer and again in fall just say that bec and that this is a multi-year process. Uh because my question had been first of all just like Janet knowing the area that is
being worked on but then I thought you only plan to do it twice and I thought that's not going to do anything. So >> according to the narrative it looks like you're only doing it twice. So if you could just remove those words and give us the new narrative I'd appreciate it.
>> Um anybody anything else? Rob, do you have anything? Just something quick, Jim. How are you? >> Good. How are you doing? >> Good. Um, is it going to be applied by a a licensed applicator? >> Yes. Yes. >> Okay. >> Myself, Jessica, and we have another
gentleman on staff. They all have we all have licenses. >> Terrific. >> Um, that's all I had. It's pretty straightforward, I think. >> I noticed some fragmitees way off on the distance as well. Maybe not on the property line or or
>> Yeah. So there's her neighbor has some another gentleman that's up another property from her that had done a pretty good job of eradicating it and then wherever her property is where we're we're working that whole space. >> So so the whole space. Okay. >> It really is a whole space and I think that's why we didn't delineate it
because it was a whole space. >> So we'll make sure that that is delineated. >> Perfect. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. >> Um I think we could go to an order. How would um
how would February 11th sound? >> Okay. Um >> okay. I move that we continue 620 Orleans Road to the meeting on February 11th, 2026 for an order of conditions. >> Second. >> Elise. >> I. >> Janet.
>> I. >> Paul. >> I. >> Bob. >> I. >> And I say I. >> Thank you. >> And we'll have that stuff for you. >> Great. That'll give you plenty of time to get it into us and then we can work the order. >> Thank you so much. Okay, the next
please. >> Next up is a notice of intent for 14 Main Street, Chattam Beach and Tennis Club, map 16B, parcel 73, SC 10-3757. Remove and replace retaining walls
within the buffer zone. Replace retaining walls and boardwalk within Coastal Dune. Good afternoon, David Clark, Clark Engineering, uh on behalf of uh the club. So, uh this is another project on
the property, uh where they're making improvements or repairs to existing, uh infrastructure. So, uh on the west side of the property is the the parking lot for the facility. Uh there are some timber retaining walls that are in
desperate need of uh replacement. Um and so in talking with their contractors, contractors felt that the best uh long-term solution would be to remove all the all the treated timbers and replace it with uh concrete blocks. Uh,
a majority of the project is outside the 100 foot buffer from the isolated wetland that's on the other side of Bers's Lane. Um, there's a short section uh uh near the entrance to the uh tennis courts that
will be replaced. That wall is only 2 ft high maybe. Um, so it's at least as far as the work that's in your jurisdiction, uh, it's pretty simple process of digging that removing and digging that stuff out and, uh, replacing it with the
with the concrete. Uh, on the south side of the parking lot, there is a stretch of, uh, timbers that are that are rotted also, and that's that really doesn't require excavation. It's just pulling them up and replacing them. Um over on
the east side uh there are some uh board and batten walls um that keep the coastal dune from um entering onto the or transitioning onto the tennis court. Uh those boards need replacing.
Uh obviously due to its location, all that work has to be done by hand. uh they're well aware of that and they and that's part of their uh contract with that uh individual that'll be doing that work. So it it
again it's it's all hand tools uh um remove the existing uh wooden structure and replace it in kind. Uh the structure is a little bit higher than the dune that's right next to it. So, we don't foresee
um much doom material uh being displaced during this this operation, especially if they can do it this spring before the weather warms up uh and then do it while the sand is still relatively wet. Um should stay in place. Um
in doing the research just be before filing this, we found that there's four outstanding orders of conditions on this. Uh, one of them thankfully uh Crystal was able to find the certificate of compliance, but it was never recorded. So, we filed all the paperwork
uh yesterday and and filed supplemental information this morning um to get those three outstanding orders uh closed out and uh a replacement uh
certificate for the one uh that was lost. Yeah, I saw that you have some um COC's for the next meeting. >> Yes. Yeah. >> So, um >> Yeah. Um >> C3, >> one of the orders was for the
replacement of the septic system that was from 1989. >> Yeah. They're all >> uh one order is for a shed um the second shed that's down on the south end of the property. >> Um third order was for the walkway out to the beach.
And the last one, the most recent was the the new deck on the east side of the building. Um, which the all those have been completed for between 40 and 10 years almost. >> Oh, wow.
>> Yeah. I think the walkway uh predates the septic system was 89. The walkway was before that. I think it was 82 83. Um, >> they are all in the folder for the next meeting. >> Yep.
>> Okay. Anybody questions, comments? Paul, I think you had something you had brought up yesterday. >> Yeah, but that's outside of our jurisdiction. >> The fill. >> Yeah. >> All of it. >> Uh, it Well, is the fill that you that you said you're going to need to change
the grading on that? Is that >> that's outside of the >> Yes. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Um this project uh um portions of this project is is within um estimated habitat rare species. So we did make a
filing under the Massachusetts Endangered Species Program. They have 30 days to respond. As of today, I did not see a comment letter. So we would have to continue this right >> because of that anyway. zone.
>> Um, >> this is going to seem silly, but there's 33 square feet of increased coverage. >> Yep. And um and I we don't show mitigation and it was kind of confirmed when I was out there staking it for for
viewing purposes. I couldn't drive a stake into the ground uh where the grass is. that little strip of grass that's two feet wide between the wall and the >> it it there's something impervious underneath that. Either it's asphalt from an older parking lot
>> or a really dense layer of clay from the tennis court. But so it's it's marginal habitat that's getting lost anyways. Uh and if it is asphalt underneath um >> you'll be improving it >> sort of. But when the that all has to
come out for the new wall. So there'll be an opportunity to plant that little strip with native grasses. U >> okay. >> Probably do a lot better than what's there now. >> Uh if if you could plant it with
something, you know, nave grasses, uh that would be terrific only because there is that increase. >> Y >> um anybody else? Bob, Janet, go ahead. So David, the the the boardwalk was
permitted in 1980 something. >> In the 80s? Yeah. >> It's been replaced since then. I mean, it's fairly new looking attracts. >> It it um Yes, it's it's supposed to be seasonal. They obviously haven't taken it out this year. Um but I did look back on Google Earth and there are instances
over the last 30 years where it's not there in the Google Earth image. um when I I believe when that that boardwalk was permitted is about the time of the break uh in the barrier beach and there was no
beach in the late 80s here. I mean the the revetment from from this property all the way north to uh a hallway of just actually >> Andrew Hardings Lane up there >> all those revetments were exposed. Um,
>> so I think there's been an incremental increase in the length of it, it appears. Um, but uh, it obviously terminates at an area that they've used as a a beach area that's now sheltered
by another dune u out to the open water. >> So, for the most part, I I feel it it it's what got permitted. Uh the materials have changed obviously because you know in 1980s you know um the only thing that was available was malmanized
lumber which is banned now. Um and they they've moved to the the tracks. >> Okay. So so it was permitted as a seasonal >> boardwalk. >> I I'm pretty sure I'll have to double check >> but just simply hasn't been taken out this year. >> This year? Yeah.
>> Okay. Because it is you know good part of it in the VE zone. So, probably not shouldn't be there through the storm season. Um, so hopefully they can take it out. I mean, we're not through the storm season yet. So, but um Okay. It
didn't seem like it needed to be replaced as part of what when I was walking on it. >> No, no. Um, this is the the area that's immediately adjacent to the tennis court. Um, >> not the boardwalk going out on >> not going out to the water. So the limit of work is is really right right where
it takes that dog leg out to the beach. Okay. All that >> that definitely needs to be replaced. That you're right. Okay. So because I was very confused going this is seems >> you know in good shape and relatively recent. But >> um so two things. One can make a note ask them to make to get that out for the
season. And secondly, there's there's a lot of scattered bits of metal um um supports from old fencing out in the dune in different places and some snow fence remnants that are out there. Can they remove that? I mean, it doesn't
look like any of that is performing any kind of function anymore. >> Yeah, I would I would Yeah. Uh one of the Google images is from quite a while ago showed the the fence quite clearly, so that was probably when it was new and >> Yep. Yeah, it has to it's mostly gone,
but the metal supports are still there sticking up out of the dune, so they should be removed. Um Okay. Uh you got my attention with uh the calling out of the uh the isolated
uh uh wetland as a possible vernal pool. What made you say that? >> That's the way it was permitted when we did the work on that property years ago. So, uh, Wilkinson did an extensive, uh, wetland restoration and we called it out as a vernal pool there. Since the town
has fixed the drainage problem on Lower Main Street, it doesn't receive very much water at all anymore. But, um, there were this time of year, they'd always be standing water in that well. >> There is now, I think. Yeah. >> But it it was a pond almost.
>> Okay. But you it's not a vernal pool. >> We didn't look at it. Um really the only work Well >> well cuz that 50ft line is >> Yep. >> Yeah. We're replacing the timbers. Um >> I I don't know what to
how to address that and we're just you know we're really >> we were expanding on paper by 33 square feet but the this basically uh replacing in kind with a better product. >> Yeah. No, I get that. But it got my attention that it said I've not seen
something pulled out as a possible vernal pool in >> Yeah. >> ever that I can think of. So, just wanted to know why you did that. Um, and it and Okay. I'm going to assume it's not maybe take
that out. Take that off the plan. And that's all I have. Yeah. And and the other reason I think the your regulations presumes it to be a vernal pool unless information's provided that it's not. >> Um and I
>> Where do you fall on that question then? And you're >> we don't want to wait till May and June to to well April, May and June to to take a look at this. Plus it doesn't change what we want to do and we we would we change anything was a vernal
pool. No, it's still 100 ft, right? So, all those retaining walls would still be outside. Okay, >> that's true. It wouldn't change that. I was just thinking about the expanded uh >> 100 ft, but you'd still be outside that even if it were
>> and and the the the notice of intent that was filed for that shed uh was just under a local approval because there there isn't a buff zone under the state regulations to the isolated So, um, >> right.
>> Okay. All right. Thank you. >> Anybody? Anything else? >> So, we do have to continue it since we're waiting for the endangered species. Uh, when did you file it? Like this week. >> Um, no. When uh we filed it. So, they've
had it for for two weeks now. Um, >> so we could continue it. Well, um I know >> they're anxious to get started on the hand the hand work uh out by the because it's a different contract that'll be doing the the major wall. So,
>> you want to go to the 28th >> if you if it's possible. Yeah. >> Yeah, it is. >> Um okay, we have a motion to go to the 28th. >> I move that we continue 14 Main Street to the meeting on January 28th, 2026. A
second >> release >> I >> Janet >> I >> Paul >> I >> Bob >> I >> and I say I all right next one Bradford please and I think it's two together. >> Yep. Next up is a notice of intent for
uh 61 Elimmits Lane 61 Elilitz Lane Filaments LLC map 16C parcel 36-14 SC 10-3758 replace old hardscape add stepping
stones remove invasive plants plant native species renovate weedy areas with fine fescue grass seed within buffer zone to salt marsh and within flood zone and uh notice of intent 463 minutes lane
Ellen Downing Gould Ellen Downing Gould Living Trust map 16C parcel 36-14 SC 10-3759 new plantings with hardscape for single family home within buffer zone to salt
marsh and within flood zone. >> Thank you. >> Hi. >> Hi. Good afternoon. Um I'm Sophia Pillings, Sweet Fern Gardening. This is Sean Frell from Shoeacher Companies. Um we also have um Bob Perry online to uh
answer questions as well with bit of a team effort. Sean is taking the head on um the site prep and um any landscape construction. I represent kind of the gardening piece of it and Bob um obviously did the the plan and um the
area calculations. So um essentially what we have is a pretty uh I guess neglected landscape. The hardscape is um really old, not so functional. Um the
vegetation is a mix of bare ground weeds um some invasive plants, some you know just regular plants. Um, and so what we would like to do is, um, refresh the hardscape, the patio,
um, refresh the, uh, some of the shell areas. Um, and we would like to put in new plantings. Um, if you've seen the site, if you've seen the site plans, we're super limited by space. So, we need this space to work for the homeowners so they can use the areas
they would like to use in any of the available garden space that could potentially have been um uh transformed from what it is now, which is again either bare ground weeds or sort of a lawn um into uh beds with native plants
in them. Um, so we would like to keep some of the, you know, Cape Cod lawn areas, have that be, uh, lowmaintenance, um, fescues, uh, but like I said, any of the garden beds that we could possibly manage to turn into plant beds use, you
know, offering, um, you know, pollen and nectar for pollinators, habitat, any sort of things like that, we we tried to do. Um, so I will take any questions you may have. Does do any other representatives want
to speak before we get into questions and comments? I don't know. I see Bob's on, but I don't see that he wants to speak. So, um then I'll open it to commissioners.
Anybody want to start? I will just with part of it. um on your coverage charts and the change and the mitigation.
Um for 61 the coverage what you're proposing for mitigation is fine. For 63, you have a um net change in the NDZ of 56,
which should be 112 mitigation. You're offering 93. Um and for the outer aura, the net change is 37.5 and you're offering 30.
So both those numbers are off. >> Okay. >> Um so you need to do something more. >> Mhm. Okay. >> Um so that's my first
comment. Um, I tell you, I I feel like I had to do a lot of work to figure out what's going where because we don't have a separate mitigation plan. >> Um, I really like having a separate
mitigation plan. Um, and I'm not sure you because within the NDZ it has to be 100% native. >> Yep. and within the outer aura 75 and I'm not I I am not
100% sure it's whether you know how it is I haven't it was just a lot to sit with the descriptions you have and go back to
>> your plan and trying to figure out um so those are just a couple comments I do have a one um email that was received from William Lightfoot at 55 Elephants Lane. He says, "I would like
to support the application for the proposed activity at 61 Elephants Lane to replace and improve the existing hardscape and vegetation. I think this will result in an attractive improvement to the neighborhood." So just so that we have that read into
the records. Anybody? >> Madam Chair. >> Yes, >> that's Bob Perry. >> Hi Bob. >> Hi there. So I um participated um with Sweet Fern Gardens to examine what they were doing and to look
at the existing site coverages and the various planting beds. Just want to put my two cents in here that um it is a difficult site to quantify all components as you would understand from being there. The largest alteration is
the introduction of stepping stones that would be considered, you know, they're quantified as hardscape, but they do provide a a surface protection for the ground to avoid groundup soil and and subsequent erosion if there were a flood. But one of the
mitigation components that may or may not be acceptable since there was limited space, you can see how scrappy the ground is. But once the site's been organized with the stepping stones, one one footnote was that um native grass
and I know I believe Sophia mentioned the native fescues. native fescue grass would then be um in every location otherwise it would be the uh the ground cover but I'm not certain that those areas have been quantified as mitigation
so the overall effect um while it didn't meet those criteria for u ratios of mitigation to hardscape the overall effect was intended to be valuable from a mitigation standpoint point, but if
you need changes, I I'm sure we can work through them. Thanks. >> Thank you. Um, anybody have any questions, comments? >> Go ahead, Bob. >> I have a question. Uh, thank thank God
you're here, Bob, to save the day. That's all I can say. Uh, just just kidding. Just kidding. Um the uh area right behind the seaw wall has um some ornamental grasses I believe
in it. What what are those grasses? >> Those are a mitigation planting that you approved last year that were put in. So that is bartina patents. It's juncerardi and uh sea lavender. So those were all part of the planting >> is
>> and the same grass mix that Sophia referred to that Bob also referred to that isn't necessarily in those mitigation calculations but is proposed as the ground cover throughout the rest of the property. >> Okay. Can can that be planted uh a
little bit more? It's pretty sparse right now. Um especially when you get maybe some uh splash over. >> Yeah. So that's sort of in process. It's a really difficult site to establish anything to grow. So those plugs were
sort of placed um you know with proper spacing. A lot of those grasses are going to spread. Um we did have some there was an early nor easter that kind of knocked back the progress. We replaced with grasses in kind and my plan is for this spring to get um you
know a new tray of that same species of plugs to fill in. I just didn't want to do it before the winter because there's just no point. Um so yeah, absolutely. We want that to establish and be dense and really to have no um need for mulchure to be able to see anything like
that. So yes, that's the goal. >> Okay. Um is there any way you can identify that on the plan then? Uh if you're going to make changes to it, >> isn't that a separate >> It is a separate >> project. So >> and I think that's already kind of
agreed upon, right? that those plants should be um established successfully at a certain rate for x amount of years. So that's sort of what I'm in the middle of doing keeping track of that success and why they haven't applied for a CFC yet.
>> Uh other than that, uh you're talking about fescue kind of grass, >> correct? >> In the area. And you and uh would you be seating that or sorting that or how would that >> um in any other case I would prefer to
seed it? Again at this site it is unbelievably hard to get seed to grow. There's splash over there's an amazing amount of wind. So sod would be much more successful >> um just to establish that healthy stand of grass. And then I would say that
anything that struggles over the years, it would be easy just to seed any spots that are bare so that we do get a good cover. Um, >> okay. So you so you just uh so probably saw probably would be more successful. Something like black beauty saw or something like that.
>> So they make a fine fescue sod chewing red. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Similar similar to the seed blend. So >> and that would be irrigated uh temporarily. >> Yesor. Yep. temporarily. >> Okay, that's all I have right now. Thank you.
>> Welcome, >> Janet. Anything? >> Yeah. Um, hi. So, um, the whole site's in the coastal flood plane, >> right? >> Yeah. And at about five feet elevation,
even with the uh wall that was installed, it strikes me that this this site is inevitably going to be flooded at different times just because of its topography and where it's located. So, I'm bothered by the increase in hardscape in a flood plane that is
particularly likely to flood. And I mean, I know you tried to address that. Um it's the in partly it's the stepping stones are awfully close together. Um maybe fewer. Um I do I saw what you you talked about maybe you you know a
possibility would be a mode path. Um but I agree that that's hard to maintain and not easy to provide the access you're looking for. But maybe there's a way that's less intensive than these large stones that are very close together. Um
but the real problem I have is the patio. >> Um having that a patio um in the flood plane like that it to me is it just can't meet a performance standard of of not decreasing the ability of the land to absorb flood
water. So um I just don't see how I can support a patio in that location. Um, but I think something might be able to be done with the stepping stones to decrease their intensity and their impact.
>> We are proposing a a permeable base for all of the hardscaping. >> Yeah. >> With the intention for it to be able to absorb some groundwater. >> So, the permeability of you're talking about like permeable pavers or what kind of material are you talking about?
>> It would be a washed crushed stone base. >> Base, but what's on top? on the surface. >> Uh we would be jointing it with pure sand or a rice stone. Uh similar to an application that we've done in uh province along Province Town Harbor. >> Yep.
>> On a driveway that floods seasonally, um we use that and we found that without the driveway settling or shifting or or needing maintenance. >> What's the what's the width of the joints? >> The joints would be 38.
>> 38. And what is the the patio material itself? >> Well, I should creates if it was a dimensional. These are we're talking about a regular stone. So, you're going to have areas where the joints are an inch, an inch and a half. >> It's tumbled blue stone. >> It's tumbled blue stone. So, there's nothing permeable about the surfacing of
the patio. It's only the joints that >> the jointing and the and the base itself. >> May I interject? >> Interesting finds. >> Excuse me. Through the chair. The there's a patio there today. I I don't recall what it was made of. Is it brick or is it blue stone?
>> It's slate. Yep. >> Slate. Yeah. >> But this patio is going to be bigger. >> Yep. >> Right. It's an expansion of that by I think about 25%. >> Yep. >> Yeah. >> So there's an ex right. There's an existing patio on a on an impermeable
base currently >> on a concrete base or something like that. >> Uh more of like a traditional like stone dust with a lot of fines in it. >> Um so >> it's not taking any groundwater. Uh, in our alternatives analysis, we offered to keep the patio the same size
if that's not an acceptable. >> I saw that. >> Yeah. So, I mean, I it's it's >> another option might be to use um a more permeable material. Permeable pavers are okay, but like blue stone, they're only permeable in the joints, so it doesn't really get you
anywhere. But there's a permeable concrete product that becomes permeable throughout. I don't know if you wanted to look into that. Um but I just I can't support expansion of blue stone um in this particular location.
>> That's all I have. Thanks. >> Okay. >> Yeah. I don't know if something like a porous paved material is necessarily viable in an environment like this. >> Um having done that in commercial applications >> only in driveways is the only place we've seen >> vacuumed and cleaned and so if you're
taking storm surge it's going to clog. Isn't that true of the joints as well? Because that's part of the problem of anything that where the only permeability in the joints unless you keep them really clear, >> a little easier to maintain. >> Yeah, it's a tough location. It is.
>> It's just a very difficult location. >> I think >> I get that and I feel for your clients because, you know, it's it's it's very constrained. It's a really tough little lot. >> Um it's a it's it's got a beautiful vista, but you know, part of the what you pay for is that it's it is in the
flood zone. If I may, um I just I think this is the piece where the functionality for the homeowners is important to consider where um the overall impact of improving this piece of land which is again weedy.
It's you know there's exposed soil all of that stuff. I think that the intent to kind of bring it back to having, you know, there be vegetation that um helps the water to soak in when we have these large precipitation events that we're having nowadays. You know, the the
overall impact of introducing this number of native plants, um this much kind of like thought into the layout. I think that, you know, having replacing a patio in kind with materials that are, you know, non-toxic, the impact is not
great on I think overall. It's such a small uh it's such a small patio on such a small lot that it it just seems like a reasonable ask to be able to replace it in kind. Um I'm not sure what the
alternative is for, you know, functional use of of the people who live there. So >> okay um as you know uh we get comments from zoning and as they have said for both
properties that zone no zoning relief is required but they also added a comment the replacement in addition to the hardscaping must not alter the grades of as the entire site falls within the co coastal consery district. So, I just
want to make sure that you are very much aware of that and that there truly is no change in grading. Okay. >> Absolutely. >> Perfect. >> Bob, go ahead. >> Just got a a question on the driveway. Is is there a driveway there now? I
didn't walk over there, but >> Yeah. >> Yes. There's an asphalt apron and there's a crush shell driveway. >> Okay. >> With a cobblestone edging. We're uh suggesting to make the driveway narrower
and uh do a cobblestone apron at the end um within the footprint if not a little smaller than the asphalt that's there currently. >> Currently there. Okay. Thank you. >> Anything else? Anybody? >> Um
okay, so How's everybody feel? Can I don't hear that we're asking them for anything. >> I'm sympathetic with the size and the >> desire to use that. I vacationed in that area when I was a kid and swam in Mil
Pond and I know those two little houses. So, >> thank you. It's it's tough to want outside space, but not for us not wanting to take up additional hard heartscape. >> I mean, I I would like to see the patio remain the size that it already is and
not be expanded. Um, I don't know if you want to go back to the owners and ask if they're amendable to that. Mhm. >> Um I think that might be our biggest stumbling block right now
>> and reduce maybe the intensity of the steppers. >> The steppers. So >> if you can just the more you can reduce the coverage and the flood zone the better. >> Yeah, sure. Um >> if I might just ask a question. If the patio was the size as proposed, but the
joints were to be established so that the hard surface was approximately equivalent to the hard surface that's there today and and a you know a medium for separating those pavers or the stones, you know, was sufficiently
permeable in your mind. Would that be an alternate? You mean having it a larger patio but be wider joints but >> equivalently absorbent? I my my take blood that would occur here is a moderately
um uh significant overwash in an Azone. It's not completely calm water but it >> the infiltration into the ground of a coastal flood um is is pretty
significant. If you have a small patio with uh spaces between stones um and it's a sandy area overall, you're going to have a very significant influx of of water into the ground. But but it
wouldn't be the kind of uh it surface stones will not be at least in my opinion something that would impede entry of flood water into the ground such that it would elevate the flood water any higher. So while I certainly
appreciate every concern about expanded surfaces in the close buffer, I don't think the threat is significant for doing that in modest and and very marginal increases. However,
if a if you think about these random shaped humbled slates, they can be patterned in a way to give you an ample sitting area, but they are often separated by several inches. And I don't know if that's amendable to the applicant because I'm not the
landscaper. And I contributed to that plan in the numerical end of it, but I we didn't do the details of the plan. But I just wanted to put it out there. If there was a size of a sitting area, but it could equal
a permeable space, maybe that's something to also consider besides removing stepping stones. >> Would you be able to provide the infiltration calculation on something like that?
Well, it would never be able to tell. >> It's a black art, but to some extent um within I would say within minutes of what would be the you know the the 100year flood at this property where there's 5 ft of water, you know,
standing. Anybody who goes to the beach, you can see how quickly water infiltrates into sand. Um we have the lifimes lane, we have the driveway, we have the houses. water is going to course into the crawl spaces of those homes.
>> Uh it's an imperfect science, but we're just looking at this generally. Um I'd be happy to try to work out something like that, but I don't think it would be meaningful. I'm just getting at the possibility that if it is, you know,
shoulderto-shoulder bricks or slates today, I think we could improve the permeability of the surface and give it that modest expansion. Well, if you could I mean I I I get what you're saying. It's a black art, but we would need to be able to make a finding that the expanded patio is the
functional equivalent from a permeability perspective of the patio that is currently there. So, there's no particular change. If we could make that finding, that might justify and be able to get us to reach the performance standard. But without it, it's really hard. >> I understand that. And if if the
applicant is truly seeking a a functional sitting area that often, you know, needs to be larger than 8 by 8, then I would agree to examine that and then bring it to you at whatever point in future this meeting continues to.
>> I think we would need that. We have to justify approving whatever is is finally approved and we have standards that we have to >> use to you know come up with that
approval. So >> well that's fair. We we've probably all seen tumbled slate patios with crushed stone in the interstitial spaces. That would be significantly more more uh permeable or uh pvious than what's
there. Mhm. >> So, I think what I was hearing, and I don't mean to go on here, but the I think the agent for the owner needs to find out if the patio can remain the same or if they'd like to explore ways to get it
bigger since that seems to be a sticking point. I don't I don't know what Sophia is. >> Yeah, sure. Thanks. >> Go ahead, Bob. >> Quite quickly. >> Go ahead. Yeah, maybe even uh maybe even 38 stone in the in the joints and maybe
I don't know half what you thinking of using half inch below or 3/4 inch below or >> so we tend to start um sometimes at inch and a half go up to 3/4 and it acts as a civ and then we're setting the stone on quarter inch stone. >> I see. Yeah. >> And using a quarter inch stone to joint
it >> in the joints. Okay. Yeah. That's how I constructed the it was essentially like a reclaimed granite driveway in Province Town >> and uh it performed incredibly well that that's the the bottom of the driveway along Commercial Street floods two to
three times a year. >> Yeah. >> And it performed incredibly well. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you. >> So we have that and we have the consider decreasing the size um of the stepping
stones. So obviously you need to come back. >> Okay. >> So when would you like to do that? We have January 28th. We have February 11th. We have February 25th. Then we're into March. >> I think January 28th sounds great.
>> Okay. For both, I'm assuming. >> Okay. I think if we could have a motion to continue both to January 28th. I move that we continue 61 and 63 LFitz Lane to the meeting on January 28th, 2026. >> Second.
>> Elise. >> I. >> Janet I. >> Paul. >> I. >> Ob. >> I. >> And I say I. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Bye. >> Thanks. >> Byebye. >> All right. The next one Bradford, please. >> Next up is a notice of intent for 101
Uncle Dean's Road. Donald and Elise Shu. Sherman dees living trust map 4D parcel 14- A10 SC 10-3 3760 project proposes to remodel and expand
the existing dwelling at the property. The project includes uh the reconstruction of the existing deck and several small additions to the footprint. project includes substantial vegetation management program for invasive plant species on the bank and
50 foot buffer. >> Okay. Hello. >> Yep. Good afternoon. Uh for the record, I'm John O'Reilly. To my right is uh attorney Bill Riley and to my left is CC uh from Blue Flax Design. Also in the audience is LC Sherman uh the owner
along with Sabel the architect. Um, so I would just like to introduce the project. So we're dealing with a property on 101 Uncle Dean's Road and it's southern border is Taylor's Pond. So we're dealing with um several
resources. Land under the body water body, which would be the pond, land subject to coastal storm flowage, which is an AE zone at elevation 12. And because the topography on the southern side, we're dealing with a coastal bank. And on the plan, you'll see that I
provided the commission several sections that um in accordance with the technical program from Duh policy from D, uh we've established the top of the coastal bank uh along the 14 uh 12oot contour and a
significant break on the in the bank on the west side of the dirt path. So, the house is currently uh the lot is currently improved with uh the single family dwelling um along with a driveway, five-bedroom septic system
and uh a series of decks. So the proposal um so just the existing conditions is we have an edge of deck to the coastal bank just under 33 feet and uh we have the dwelling at 46 just under
47 ft again from the coastal bank. So the proposal is to add three additions to the house. Um the first addition is the addition on the entry which is on the north side of the building uh approximately 90 ft away from the
resource. We have a proposed sun room which will be elevated on posts on the east side of the building. Uh we are also uh proposing a small addition again to the north of the sun room um in that
corner uh to the footprint of the building. So, the idea here is we're going to utilize the existing foundation for the um for the home itself, add three additions, and then completely
redo the redo the wood frame portion of the house and rebuild that portion of the house. the um so with with regards to where we are with the proposed setbacks, we are looking at um the deck is going to be
reconstructed on the southern side. And so that will be I'm sorry I misspoke. The existing deck is uh 31 ft away from the coastal bank. The proposed deck, as I said, is at 33 feet uh from the bank. Um the sun room is um 37 feet uh 38 feet
away from the bank as well. So we are working within the um 50 foot buffer and we have asked for a uh variance to do so. We've given you some alternative analysis. Um CC and her team uh have
developed the uh mitigation plan. are we do show um just under 200 square feet of expansion in the 50- foot uh buffer zone um and a uh little less than 600 ft in the 50 to 100 foot buffer zone
and Blue Flax have come up with the mitigation proposal uh to offset that um expansion. I do know that um staff has asked several questions so I'll address those
now. One um we are adding some fill on either side of the house. The total of fill is less than 50 cubic feet um on on for the retaining walls. I think that was one question. Um there is
um a conflict between the two plans with the rinse station. So, we will certainly address that in a revision. And is that the I think that was the only thing that was the only two. I'm sorry. Um, we did s we did uh Mr. Riley and and
myself did file with the zoning board of appeals for this. Um, they've asked for some clarifications which are going to necess necessitate a revision. Um, it mostly has to do with the pool location outside your jurisdiction. Um, so but I
do owe them that revised plan. So with that, I'd be I'll turn it over to Cece and um we'll go from there. >> All right. Hi everyone. CeCe Cameli with Bluefax Design and I will kind of just walk through the site and what we are
proposing for you. Um we are proposing to manage um everything within jurisdiction all of the property. Um and I have hatched different areas um throughout
the property that have different varying degrees of invasive species management. Um it's about it's over 5,000 square feet this whole area that we're proposing to manage. Um and yeah, I'll just kind of walk it walk through.
Great. Um so I am going to begin just identifying the different kind of colors that correspond with the key. We have this dark green area uh that has a higher presence of invasive species that we
noticed uh kind of at 60%. Um those invasive species include bittersweet shrub honeysuckle, autumn olive, porcelain berry, English ivy, periwinkle, and there are uh black locust saplings throughout the site. Um
the lower amount of invasive species we identified is in this lighter green area. Uh there's really beautiful native vegetation present throughout this site. It's a well canopied site. um healthy native vegetation, oak pitch pine plant
community, um Pennsylvania sedge as the ground cover, bay berry throughout. And then as we get closer to the pond, we have um Spartina patents, the salt marsh hay, and um high tide bush prevalent. Um
so it's a an well-veated site and for the most part is not heavily invaded. Uh but we propose to manage all invasive species we identify on the site and restore the areas that we manage more heavily uh which is
denoted with the different colors. We have a small area here um in orange which is a historically managed area for vistas to the pond of topped oak trees
um that have been pruned and managed for decades. And these trees are in poor condition uh from the pruning practices. Fungal disease has gotten into these trees. Um the tops of the canopy are very dense which shades the understory
and so there is not a lot of uh plant species growing beneath these oak trees. Um and they're not able to reach fruiting mature size. So they no longer produce acorns. So we are proposing to remove 14
historically topped oak trees from this vista area and we're replanting the entire area densely with native vegetation that's more appropriate to maintaining these views without the need for continued pruning and maintenance.
>> Thank you. We also are proposing to remove 19 native trees and two non-native use from within the 100 foot buffer for the construction of
this project. Uh and per the Chattam regulations, we are replacing these trees one to one. Um so replacing 21 trees for 21 trees within the hundred. Uh, and we're also kind of planting them into the the 50 as well so that we're
not overcrowding um the area that we're replanting. We also in this little red hatch right there is the existing path and we're proposing Thank you. to just reroute the
path so that it lines up better with the flow of the house. Uh and so the homeowners have easier access down to the path uh and will restore this entire existing path area.
Um and the existing path does have areas of erosion and siltation and can be a bit slippery and hard to walk on. So we are proposing in ground steppers along the path kind of to be determined in field uh as
we as we begin this restoration process. We can um be more specific if you'd like with number of inground risers on the path. Um but that is our plan so far. Thank you. Okay.
Does anybody want to start? >> Go ahead, Bob. >> Hi. How are you? >> Good. How are you? >> Good. Um, on the proposed uh uh sun room or sun porch, u you're encroaching into
the uh no disturb zone, correct? >> That's Yes. Um I I would uh be in favor of reducing the size of either the the decking. I know the existing deck is there already. Either the deck or the um
sun porch. Um because you are encroaching into the no disturb zone. Um, there are also a couple of pine trees um out beyond the where the sun porch is proposed that I I'd like to keep as
well. Um, they're pretty far away from the from the house itself. I don't know if you can you can locate those now, but >> they are they just east of the proposed sun room as it staked? >> Yes. Yeah.
>> Yeah. >> And they're pretty far out. >> Okay. Um, >> I know there's some autumn autumn olive along the >> edge of the grass. Um, that's pretty that's pretty bad. And I'm I don't have any problem with the with the rest of the invasive species
control or the planting. Um, and I like the idea of the path. I I saw the erosion on the path. I think that's a great idea to add the step this the inground steps. Um, you might want to um
include the kayak rack um at the bottom of the path which is there which is which is nice as well for the environment. >> Yes, I am showing that it's just a little I know this is a busy plan. I
have it shown right here. >> Yeah, that okay. >> Okay, I see it. Thank you. Um anyway, uh so that's really my two cents
at this point. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Anybody else? I do have two butter letters, so we can read them now or >> go ahead. So I I I agree with Bob about
um the location of the porch. Um you've got an awful lot of outdoor living um areas uh on this plan. Um and I given the options and and what's available, it
doesn't strike me that um you need to have that encroachment into the no disturb zone. Um and I had a suggested idea for how that might be remedied, but it it it actually brought up another issue. Um but the suggestion was it
you've got a proposed new deck um back in the in the outer aura. Um again given that the the amount of decking that's already there, I'm not sure that that's going to be needed. It's under the trees. I it doesn't really have much of a view. Maybe if you put the screen
porch there and eliminate that deck, that gets the screen porch out of the no disturb zone. But that made me look at the coverage in the outer aura and I didn't see a calculation of what the percentage is because we our regulations
t maximize coverage in the outer aura at 35%. >> It's 56.1. >> Okay. So this is this is already over which is why you know my idea is sort of started and stopped. Um >> it's on the top. >> Okay. So, um, you would just need a a
variance for that instead of for the screen porch. And I would tell you that I would support that just because it's so much further back and out of the way and closer to the house that I that kind of a variance would would probably get my support as opposed to a variance for a screen porch where you've got it
located. Um, the only other thing I would say, yeah, it 19 trees is a lot and I guess that's because of the re the grading that's going on. Um, that's if if Bob's suggestion of saving
some of them is worth looking at. But what really is bugging me to be honest is um the topped oaks. So, I feel like we've seen this so many times now where
is is there an approved vista corridor or view window on this property? >> No. >> No. That's why it's just called historically managed. >> Um, so without any approval or permitting, um, what's happened is that these oaks
have essentially been destroyed and will be replaced by native shrubs. Nothing against native shrubs, they're great. They are nowhere near the kind of ecosystem value that native oaks provide. And it feels like the more we allow this to happen, the more we are
rewarding people for topping oaks and then planting with shrubs that will never grow into the view window again. Uh too late to save these trees. I get it that they are doomed. Um but I'd want to see them replaced with native oaks which will take years and years to grow
into the view. They can enjoy that. But it would at least you'd be you'd be swapping out what's being lost for what can be replaced rather than shrubs. So that's my two cents on that. >> I agree.
>> Right. I have two a butter emails and I'll read them. The first is from Linda O'Brien. She says, "We are a butters to the property on the east and north sides. We support the efforts to manage views to Taylor's Pond on the south
facing side of the property. Efforts to add native species and ground cover to stabilize the bank and introduce native vegetation to restore the damaged oaks will improve the health of the coastal bank and provide the owners with a better vista. However, we do not support
the request to remove 19 healthy mature trees on the east side of the property. The stated objective slashoutcome number one of the project is to improve wildlife habitat function and value throughout the buffer zones and this
work will likely do the opposite. This is an uniquely vibrant wildlife area. An active population of eastern coyote and red fox regularly travel through this area moving between Taylor's Pond and Cole Cove Marsh. Additionally, the tree
canopy supports several species of birds of prey, including osprey, redtailed and cooper hawks, great horned owls, and many species of migratory and native birds. We have seen even seen eastern box turtles and spotted salamanders in
these woods. The proposed project would likely have a significant negative environmental impact on these wildlife populations. The disturbance to this area should also be considered within the broader work proposed for the entire parcel,
including the upland outside the 100 foot buffer zone where the plan is to remove several more trees and significantly alter water runoff and wildlife passage for the by the proposed installation of the pool and patio. That is not in our jurisdiction. So just so
we note that. Um she says, "Additionally, while not a primary concern for the con conservation commission, is worth noting that the current tree line on the east side of the property provides a natural buffer for noise and light between our properties. The proposed sun room and
undefined small addition adjacent to it will significantly alter the current relationship. We would like more information about the size and purpose of the third edition. Sun rooms are generally not compatible with trees and shading. So, we are interested in
gaining a better understanding of the specific plantings proposed on the east side of the property to remedy the removal of these existing tree line buffer. Finally, this project involves consequential work within the 50oot no disturb zone, especially on the east
side of the house. So we have questions about how this project can be completely respect completed respectfully in addition to our significant concerns regarding its impact to the ecosystem. So and they are at 152 Kakal cove road
and then it also says Stephen and Eileen O'Grady at 146 Coakle Cove Road. We have a second uh email that I think was received today. Um it is from Megan Clifford Maret
Marcenelli. I am in butter to 101 Uncle Dean's Road and appreciate the opportunity to review the proposed site plan and land management plan for this project. I support efforts to restore native vegetation, manage invasive species, and
stabilize the coastal bank. and I recognize the care given taken in addressing wetland resource areas. However, I have several concerns as a neighboring property owner that I respectfully request the commission to consider prior to approval. The first is
wildlife movement and corridor continuity. The project materials stated state an objection I'm sorry objective of improving wildlife habitat and connectivity given the removal of trees on the property and
the proposed hardscape fencing walls and recreational uses outside the 100 foot buffer. I am concerned about the cumulative impact of wildlife movement between Taylor Pond and the surrounding marsh and upland areas. I would appreciate clarification on how wildlife
corridors cross the parcel will be maintained during and after construction. Again, anything outside our jurisdiction of 100 ft we cannot um consider. Property line setbacks, structures, and vegetative buffering is her second
concern. While the plans address what limb buffers in detail, it is not clear to me how close the proposed pool, patio, gazebo, and building additions are to the property lines. And I'm can continue that one because again, it's about outside of our jurisdiction.
Um, she says the existing tree line on the north side of the property currently provides an important natural buffer for privacy, light, and noise between our properties. The removal of mature trees combined with increased activity associated with the pool, patio, gazebo,
sunroom may significantly alter these conditions. I respectfully request additional detail regarding proposed replacement of plantings and long-term buffering measures intended to mitigate these impacts.
Another concern is storm water and drainage impacts. I am concerned about potential changes in storm water runoff resulting from the proposed pool patio associate grading and hardscape. Um she wants clarification regarding how storm
water is managed for these elements and confirmation that post construction runoff would not be redirected and concentrated toward a property line. Finally, I would like to note that I did not receive direct or certified notification of this application and
learned of it through other neighbors. I'm a part-time resident, as are many of the people in the area. I would hope that part-time residents and owners would be given a fair opportunity to address these plans. I raised this only to ensure that all butters are
appropriately informed and able to participate fully in the review process. Um, and she's at 95 Uncle Dean's Road. So, I don't know what happened with your notifications of a Butters, but so that's those are the two letters that we
received. And again, anything dealing with the pool and all that area is not in our jurisdiction. So, we will not be considering any of that. And hopefully maybe the these people who have concerns about
that can speak with the owner, the representatives and and get some answers to that part, but it's not in our jurisdiction. So, do you have anything to say concerning those lovely very short emails?
>> Well, thank you. Thank you for reading them. Um, first and foremost, the the butter issue. Um, Miss Clifford is on the butter list. Miss Clifford got a certified mail. I got a white slip. So, I don't know what happened, but we
followed the policy. I That was the most important thing as far as notification. >> I'm sure you did. I'm just saying maybe somehow some something didn't work. >> Sure. No, that's understandable. Um, I was wondering if we could get copies of those emails sent to me just through
>> Sure. Bradford, could you send those? Could you forward them? you put them on our site. So, thank you. >> Um, did you >> Yeah, I think the uh with regard to the uh
sun room, the elevated sun room in terms of its incursion into the no disturb zone, we're really just putting a support post in there. Um, it's not like we're excavating out
in that section. So, I think the the u and I think you have to keep in mind uh the location of the property and the prevalence of mosquitoes and things that make
outdoor um time very uncomfortable. And so the I think the uh it's nice to have the wood deck for during when the sun is out, but you really need something with screens
uh to protect the the folks if they're outside at all, you know, sundown or on a damp day. So I'd like you to keep that in mind as a as a justification for, you know, having that structure there.
>> Okay. Anybody have anything else? Go ahead, Elise. >> I just want to underscore both Bob and um Janet's points on the trees. If we can save any of the healthy trees that Bob talked about and the planting of
oaks would be spectacular if you could put some of those guys in at a an interesting size. Um the other question I had in the um there's there are lamp there's a lamp post notation. Are we
going to do lighting along that path or what what is that? >> That's an existing lamp post right here. >> Um I haven't spoken to the client whether she would like to keep that or not. It's near the path that we're rerouting and so I would imagine that
it's going to be removed. Um but that's not something that Okay. spoken to her with, but I check on that. >> We'll take the light post out if it's going to mean a positive result. >> You want to?
>> You could replace it with an oak. >> We actually like to turn it on so the foxes can see where they're going. >> Oh, thanks. Um, any other comments? Um just just for some clarity since we
do have the owner in in the audience um is the commission's feelings that none of the screen porch can be within the no disturb. >> So I've also just been reminded that the the screen porch is over the septic
tank. So, you know, so it's not exactly, as we say, pristine, but >> I I I can't speak for everybody, but I also have an issue with the 56%
coverage in the outer aura. Um, >> okay. I I mean that's significantly higher than 35%. And we are going to have if if that were to remain and we're okay with it, we're going to have to have some
very good reasons why we can approve that because that is significantly higher. >> Okay. Thank you. That's the kind of feedback I was looking for. Appreciate it. If I can just add to that, um it looks like a lot
of that is coming from the existing uh footprint of the house, >> right? >> Yes. >> So, um I'll just repeat what I said about avoiding the incursion into the no disturb zone by moving the screen porch into the outer aura. Um which would
increase the the coverage, but it would avoid on the other hand the no disturb zone coverage. that's something I would be able to support that variance because you're avoiding a more important uh impact. So >> even though it is on, you know, on a
post. >> Yeah. No, I get that it's on a post and it's over over the system, but >> you know, I can see that there's an opportunity there to to reconfigure, redesign its location in a way that keeps it out of the no disturb zone.
Yeah. Go ahead. >> And also, you know, the the amount of decking that that there is currently, I mean, that could be reduced as well. >> Okay. >> That was I was going to bring up. >> Yeah. To offset the uh
the uh screened uh porch. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Yeah, I mean I don't know what the percentage of coverage is currently. I mean really you're not adding a huge
amount in the outer aura. You're adding 682 square feet yet that puts you at 56.1. I you know Janet has a great comment about yes most of this is within the existing footprint of the ex
existing house. So obviously that you know would also be a way that we can consider this by having that that number as well because if it's let's say
it were 50% now 6% more is a lot less than saying it's it's you know >> yeah one of the first ones I had is I need to provide you the existing coverage >> it it well the percentage yeah I think that would also help us, but anything
you can do and as Janet said, you know, protecting the NDZ is even more important. So, you know, even if the screen porch were more into the outer aura, the benefit is there's less of an impact in the NDZ.
>> Okay. >> So, there's a few things to consider. >> Did you have anything else? >> Anything else? No, we're going to have to uh because we're revising the plan, uh the zoning board's being moved off as
well. So, >> right. So, you've got some time because I know that that's not complete yet. And so, when would you like to come back? I
>> think we're going to need more than a couple weeks to kind of figure out where we're headed. So, we have February 11th, February 25th, March 11th, March 25th, and then we're into April. >> Yeah. Uh, I'm out of town on the 11th, the week of the 11th. >> Okay. So, you want to do February 25th?
>> I think February 20. Yeah. The second meeting is the best one for us. >> Perfect. Even better. Okay. If we could have a motion, please. I move that we continue 101 Uncle Dean's Road to the meeting on February 25th, 2026.
>> Second. >> Elise. >> I >> Janet. >> Hi. >> Paul. >> I. >> Bob. >> I. >> And I say I. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Bradford. The next. >> All right.
Moving on to certificates of compliance. I'll read the next two in as well. Um, we have a certificate of compliance 430 to Squantum Road, Steven and Jennet Nimi, map 14 A2, parcels N51 and N158,
SC 10-2696. Uh this was for a view corridor tree removal and trimming footpath and addition and a COC for30 to Squantum Road Steven and Jennet Mimi map 1482
parcels N51 and N 158 SC 10-3141 uh for the construction of a deck two patios with stairs and retaining walls. Um I can
there's a few things so I'm just going to go through >> please >> through all of them. Um for uh the first one SC 10-2696 they did receive a partial COC for the hardscape in 2019.
Um and in that partial COC there was an ongoing condition for viewp pruning and maintenance of the overlook path. uh with prior notification to uh the conservation agent. Um when Paul and I went out there last
week, um it looked like the view pruding had been more extensive than what was um approved within those view corridors. Um so we're I would recommend um redefining those view corridors and bringing in
that ongoing condition into this condition as well. So contacting uh conservation prior to doing any view management um just so we can bring it back to what it was. >> Okay.
>> Um and with 3141 um I didn't there were some minor deviations with the plantings um but I didn't see any major issues with uh with the heartscape.
Okay. Thank you. Did you want to comment? >> Um, no. I I >> I can also address the >> uh I did speak with Brad uh Bradford last week about this and um and the the conditions the ongoing conditions about
the view pruning um is understandable. >> Okay. Um anybody have anything else? Any commissioners? If I may, um I did also want to mention that there was a cleared area of
vegetation on the east side of the property. Um I did some research and realized that was over the septics leech field. >> Um and the last couple of uh septic
inspections have recommended um maintaining the vegetation over that area. So I my assumption is that uh they went a little overboard and cleared a larger area than was necessary. However,
there were some woody vegetation that wouldn't be appropriate over a leech field. Um so I'd recommend um most likely a separate filing um just to replant that area with something more appropriate over the leech field.
>> Okay. your thoughts. >> Uh the septic system went in over 15 years ago and when it when it was installed it was outside of any resource area. So that easterly southeasterly
side of the property was not within conservation's jurisdiction. Um so that's really the only place on the property put the leech field at that time that was outside your jurisdiction. The flood plane obviously changed in 2014. Uh it it came up I think two feet or
maybe three feet in stage harbor which then gave it gave the floodwaters access to the old cranberry bog that's on stage island. Um and uh and the the extent of that um that flood zone comes up to the
south side of the house now. Um and so now there's a new coastal bank. Um and so and that's that is reflected on the 2016 plan um that had the the um deck
edition um and the landscaping. So um looking at the Google Earth images going back there was a period of time where they were maintaining that area over the the the leech field. They certainly haven't done it in a long time and and
woody vegetation is coming up and that that does not bode well for the longevity of the system to have uh trees grow up over it because it is a stone trench system. Um it's easily infiltrated by root systems.
>> So Bradford's recommending that you come or the owner come with a a you know a a separate application for that. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, the property is scheduled to close, I think, next week.
Um, and uh and I believe that the buyer is aware that um that they should maintain the vegetation over the system >> and that they should come to us for >> approval. They'll have to come to you for a maintenance plan approval. >> Okay. All right. Thank you.
>> Welcome. Uh then I think we can have a motion for these uh with the um ongoing condition. Any future purinating uh for the first one 2696 would uh need to be done with prior approval from the
conservation commission or conservation department. >> Okay. Okay. I move that we approve the certificate of compliance for 30 disquantum road as modified. >> Second. >> Elise. >> I. >> Janet. >> I. >> Paul. >> I.
>> Bob. >> I. >> And I say I. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Next one. Bradford, please. >> All right. Next is another certificate of compliance for 114 Bucks Creek Road. Mahoney Revocable Family Trust. Map 8B,
parcel 59-S98, SC10-2254, uh, construction of an addition and deck to an existing family dwelling. So, this is also an old order, um, from 2006.
Um, the hardscape was completed. Um there was uh it seems to be two feet wider than what was originally approved. I think we had approved a 10 by6 and it ended up being a 12 by6.
Um there is an existing shed and shower that presumably predates the order of conditions. Um and um what we didn't see was that uh any of the mitigation plantings were planted.
Um there was a note to provide a sketch plan of the plantings um to conservation um that was never uh provided to us. Um, and given the situation of this uh this
particular order, um, the original homeowner passed away a couple months ago and her, uh, family is in the process of selling the house. Um, so my recommendation would be to uh approve the COC so we don't hold up the the
selling. Um and then providing um the mitigation plantings as an after the fact. Um we could do an administrative review or an RDA if you guys would prefer. Um but I spoke to them this morning and I
believe you are willing to do those mitigation plantings. >> Okay. Hi. Did you want to speak at all? >> Go for it. >> Just identify yourself first. >> Sure. for the record, Rick Jud, Moran Engineering Associates. More importantly, uh to your left, my right,
is Dr. Sally Mahoney. Uh that's the um estate's daughter. Um 2006 um was Moran Engineering Incorporated uh that dissolved uh back in 2013. So, we did some research and were able to um go
through ZBA and locate the same date, same plan. why it wasn't on the conservation plan showing the shed, we have no idea, but uh the shed does um have record of being there at the same date. And then we did a Google search also on Google Earth and we're able to
identify it. So um there was little discrepancy of um an addition of 32 square feet on the deck that's on the support post son tubes. Uh and then we did note that the actual stairs were instead of being on the east side were
uh built on the west side. Uh so functionally they were just shifted over. Um we didn't have in our research um and in our file research at our office um any sketch of a mitigation plan. So uh in
the front yard there are plantings. I I can't qualify that they are mitigation plantings. The backyard is um in my opinion with one exception somewhat wild. But we would be happy to work with
the um modification on 420 square feet versus the three 402 versus the three. Thank you. So that's certainly in line. We would ask if the through the chair if
the commission would be um uh agreeable to uh partially um certify at least the construction aspect of this and the plants could be done at another time. >> So are you recommending a partial or
does that not fulfill the being able to close on the house? I think in this circumstance um we could go with the full COC with the understanding that they would file um
>> come back to us for a mitigation plan. >> Exactly. Yes. >> Okay. And can we when we approve the COC could we put a condition in there that a mitigation plan would be coming to us in the future?
>> I think so. Yeah, I think that would be appropriate. >> I think just so we have it on record some place. >> I can have a for the record um >> uh within two weeks I'll have a mitigation plan u for review and then we
can uh look for a date certain when the weather gets a bit warmer for the installation. >> Sure. >> Okay. We can also um if you're willing to move that quickly um we can uh never mind because that would hold up. I was going to say we can hold the COC
pending plan but that would hold up >> be hard to hold it for a mitigation. So I think putting something in the COC that says that they will be coming to us for a plan would at least have it on record someplace. >> Yes. Yep.
>> Okay. So we could have if anybody have any other questions. >> I got a question. >> Go ahead, Bob. >> Um the um I think there are uh uh railroad ties under the deck itself. Did you notice those in the ground?
>> So there um when you face the back of the house, there's a door that leads to the lower level. The proposed addition on this particular plan is physically to the left and that's a crawl space. So, I did see that there were um there's a set
of stairs uh that go down to um what was the pre-existing uh to the left is the deck and the addition on the crawl space. So, yes, I did see that. >> But are they serving a purpose or >> uh I don't think you could open the door without um for the pre-existing I don't
think you could open the door without that. >> Okay. I thought I thought they were just laying in the ground. I just saw a couple laying in the ground. No. >> Oh, no. If you look in the photographs that I supplied, there's a door uh right there, and that's how they get in and
out of the um the basement. >> I see. Okay. >> Yes. >> Okay. Anything else? Then could we have a motion, please? >> Yeah. I move that we continue that I'm sorry. I move that we approve the uh
114 Bucks Creek Road to the um continue it for a certificate of compliance as modified. Second. Elise. >> Hi. >> Janet. >> Hi. >> Paul. >> Hi. >> Bob. >> Hi. >> And I say I. >> So, thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. You're all set. Um, okay. The next, please. >> Next up is the proposed changes to the Chattam Wetlands regulations. >> Okay. So, we've had a couple hearings on this
and modifications were made. Um, does do any commissioners have any further comments? I don't see anybody online that So, nobody um what? Yeah. All right.
So these are the only modifications to the regulations are to have it go hand inand with the new applications that we have um started implementing this month. So um
I think that's why nobody has any really uh thing to say about it besides us. So I guess we could have a motion to approve. I move that we approve the modifications to the Chattam wetland regulations. >> Second. >> Elise. >> I. >> Janet.
>> I. Paul. >> Hi. >> Bob. >> I. >> And I say I. Okay. The next Bradford. And we're going to have to do these separately because different people were out for different meetings. >> All right. Uh, so first up would be
minutes for November 12th, 2025. >> Yep. Anything? Anybody have any additions, corrections besides what maybe is on teams right now? Okay, then if we could have a motion, please. >> I move that we approve the minutes from
November 12th, 2025. >> Second. >> Okay. Elise >> I. >> Janet. >> I. >> Paul. >> I. >> You have to abstain. You are out. >> You were out on November 12th. >> Abstain. >> Bob. >> I. And I say I Okay, the next one,
please. >> Next is uh the minutes for December 3rd, 2025. >> Okay. Anybody have anything more to add, modify on those? >> I have one thing,
>> please. on 88 Seagull Road >> later on in the meeting. Uh not at the beginning. Uh let's see the u second to the third to last sentence. He also asked where the erosion is going. I
want to change that to he also asked where the soil uh has eroded to. >> Oh, that's Yeah, that's better. >> Where is it? Where is it? third to last sentence on 88 Seagull Road. >> It's down further. It's we we kind of
postponed it in the meeting. We tabled it until later. >> Trying to find >> So it came up twice. >> The third >> December 3rd. I don't think it's on December 3rd. I think you've got the 17th.
>> I'm not seeing A8 Seagull. Let's go into 17th. >> Oh, I'm sorry. Yeah. >> No, that's fine. I'm just looking. Okay. I think cusser.
Yeah, it's in the 17th. So, what did you want it to? He also asked where the erosion is going and you wanted to say >> uh yeah >> Bob asked the board that the borders not
be railroad ties and be pressuret treated wood and then it says he also asked where the erosion is going. Uh he also asked where the soil has eroded to. >> Oh that's yeah that's better.
And you're getting it. >> Okay. >> Sorry about that. >> Nope, that's fine. But we'll go back right now to December 3rd >> because I think I was absent till December 3rd. >> I think you were absent December 3rd. So, anything else on December 3rd?
>> No. Then we could have a motion. >> I move that we approve the minutes from December 3rd, 2025. >> Second. >> Okay. Elise. >> I. >> Janet. >> I. >> Paul. >> I. >> Bob. >> Abstain. >> And I say I. Okay. December 17th, right?
>> Okay. Besides what Bob just added, anything else? >> Okay, we can have a motion. >> I move that we approve the minutes from December 17th, 2025. >> Second. >> Elise, >> I. >> Janet, >> I. >> Paul, >> I >> Bob >> I
>> and I abstain. >> All right. So, we got through that. So, I think we have one more motion. I move that we adjourn the hearing. >> Second. >> Elise. >> Hi. >> Janet. >> Hi. >> Paul. >> Hi.
>> Bob. >> Hi. >> And I say I. >> Thank you. I'll