Thank you. Commission meeting for January the 8th, 2026. We operate under the Massachusetts general bylaw general law chapter 131 section 40 the wetlands protection act and chapter 26 of the town of Denver's
general bylaws the wetlands protection bylaw after each applicant presents his or her request and a board has had time to ask questions and discuss the project we will accept questions from the audience because this is a public meeting is required by law that you give your name and your address before you
speak. Although we may disagree on the issues raised, all persons present during this meeting are expected to be civil to all of the meeting attendees. This includes members of the commission, staff, abutters, concerned citizens, property
owners, and project applicants. We also request that you confine your questions to the project and only as it pertains to the wetlands act. We cannot handle nor do we have jurisdiction over matters such as noise or traffic. All problems not related to the wetlands protection
act in the town town of Danver's wetlands protection bylaw must be taken up with the other appropriate boards. Uh first order of business be a roll call. Peter Wilson is present. Lorraine Drapek >> present. >> Mary Heights >> present.
>> Paul McNelte >> here present. >> And Michael Splain >> here. Uh first order first order of business on our agenda is a notice of intent for 80 Water Street D file number 14-1433.
The applicant is Peter McKinnon and the applicant has requested to continue to our next meeting which is on January 22nd 2026. So if someone can make a motion we will continue the hearing until then. Uh, I'll move to continue the public be
hearing for 80 street d14-1433 to January 22nd, 2026. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I I All right. So, kick the can down the road. Uh, next up is a notice of intent for nine Jacobs Landing, D file number
14-1445. The applicant is Jeffrey Bunk. And are you here by yourselves tonight or >> No. uh my representative evidently running late I don't know the story but I'm sure he'll be right
>> okay why don't we just uh table that for a moment and we'll just continue on we'll do the old and new business >> thank you >> you're welcome uh so uh first order of the old and new business is minutes from our December 11th 2025 uh has everyone had a chance to look at
those minutes and >> uh digest the new format with the the discussion to see >> everyone okay with it's I know there's going to be some changes along the way Jen is working on that so any comments feedback anything feel free to reach out to her she's open to
>> and that's a standardized approach to >> yeah because right now planning zoning and uh conservation and I think two other boards have all different ways that the minutes are done so we're trying to make it um kind of a universal format >> okay uh is there any other discussion on
minutes or should we just move to accept them can make a motion Motion that we >> accept the minutes. >> Accept the minutes. There we go. >> From December from the day of the day. >> Sorry. >> Sorry. Where are we here? Motion to
accept the minutes from December 11th, 2025. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I >> I >> I have to abstain. I wasn't >> Good way. Yeah, but you have to read me so you can get up to speed if I did read them. I just have to abstain from voting.
Uh, if you're all set, it's the floor is yours. >> How are you? Luke Fabrey, Geological Field Services. So, we had a site visit um yesterday, >> Tuesday, >> and um >> Tuesday. >> Tuesday. >> Tuesday.
>> Yeah. >> Thursdays. >> Yeah, >> Tuesday. Um and so taking the uh hybrid master's uh comments previously, we have rotated
the orientation of the dock of the entire actually gang way. I rotated it uh 5 and a half degrees to the east and that caused the um this corner to come back 5 ft and
this to come forward. So we're 25 ft back from the channel now and we're parallel to it. So it's not kind of cockeyed as it was before. Um and
we still sit on the concrete um curb if you will that's part of um it sits at a little bit of an angle but the entire pier sits on that curb. Um there was uh comments back from the
harbor master that uh he wanted us to pull it back even further. Um but we have and he he referenced a section of the Damis regulations uh section 4 paragraph 1D which requires an
18 minimum 18in minimum um clearance for the floats on a nonshellfish title flat. This is actually a shelfish title flat. So it should be 24 in >> which is the next sentence. But that's a
a minimum requirement. Um it's not a maximum requirement. Right now we have uh 4.9 um feet and we meet all the criteria for the the town regulations, the state regulations,
and the federal regulations as it exists now. And um you know I I don't really have anything else to say uh other than I think that it's fully permittable as it exists and
we've accommodated the rotation. We're actually set back um further from the channel than the next floats up. And I I mean I I've run the river quite a bit
over my life. I think the pinch point the harbor master is concerned about occurs after these floats coming into Danvas. I I really don't think that this is an issue here. Uh the river's about
1,200 ft wide. The channel's 200 ft wide and there's sign sufficient room for you know the boats to to navigate this river. And that's really all I have for you this I'll speak uh for the harbor master if I can and correct me if I'm
misinterpreting but >> I think what he's saying with the the depth of the floats that you have there uh you're out farther than the minimum requires and he just wants to have a short appear in any any case any applicant that comes in nothing.
>> Can you scroll up just a little bit? The short appear we're talking like a few feet difference. um that there's we're right on the edge. If you look at this, see how we're on the edge of this embankment. So, if we pull this pier back, you know, there's
even, you know, six, seven feet, we're we're losing we're losing water. And what's going to happen is the boat that sits on the on the outside of this is going to ground
at low tide. So that the very thing that you're trying to avoid doing, which is impacting the title flats, is we we have the ability not to ground. If we pull it back five, six feet, we're going to start grounding it because we're right
we're right on the edge of this of the breaking slope. You can see how it's 12. Do >> you have that somewhere on your drawing that showed that next level? If you scroll up, you'll see this way. There we are. So, you can see even the
the front of our floats, um, we lose these are in twoft increments. From the front of the float to the back of the float, we lose two feet. >> So, he's he's looking at just this front of the float. If I come back more,
what's what's going to happen is I'm going to lose, you know, I need to be for this I should be 24 in on the back end and on the front end I'm going to lose that. And what's going to happen is if you put a, you know, a 26T Grady
White has a has a a 28T draft, a 28 inch draft, excuse me. Um, the boats are going to be bottoming out, not not the floats. So what he's trying I mean >> we don't want that. That's
>> we don't want that. And and and it's also we're talking like six feet. It it doesn't it doesn't really affect effectively pull the the the pier back adequately
and it ends up we start we start bottoming out at low tide. And that's mean low tide. That's not low low tide. low low tide, I lose another foot. So, I mean, I understand what he's saying,
but in the the grand scheme of things, if you look at all the floats on on the river, this is a fully permeable float pier system. And um I don't see that as being a reason to
deny it. I mean, >> I'm I'm just, you know, I'm speaking for the harbor master again. He's he just Let me speak, please. I understand what he's saying and and we talked about this, but you know, like I said, if if I pull this back here, then I start, you
know, because I'm on the on I'm on the slope, I'm going to get 5t, 8 feet, the max, and I'm already behind the next two floats up the the two systems up the river. And the the
channel is 200 feet wide. I know the channel marker is in the middle of the channel, but it is a 200 foot wide channel. And um I I think my my client does not want to lose the ability to put
a boat on here that So this is 8T by 10T and this is 6x 20. So there's a a 30foot float that exists here. And you know, I said a 26- ft Grady White, a 28T Grady
White drafts, you know, in 3 ft. A regulator drafts 3 and 1/2 ft. there. There's plenty. And if you have a boat that has um not an outboard, but a an inboard, you draft even more. So,
your your prop is down. And so it by pulling it back just 8 ft limits the type of boat that you can put on the end of this. And you know >> I think now that I can speak my piece. >> Yes. Absolutely.
>> Harbor Master is just looking to have as much open water as possible. That's why he's always encouraging people to bring it back. >> Understood. >> Uh I don't we just leave it at that. >> Okay. I mean, it's I I and I I
appreciate that there's nobody there's nobody else to our east with the last pier on this >> for now on the river for now. You could get there actually two other houses left
and then everything else is open all the way to the Kernwood. >> Mhm. And you know, if you look at some of the other pictures that I've put forward on the other side of the river, every single house has a pier. And they're way closer together than this
is. And I mean, this is like probably one of the most open spaces in Danvers that there is. And um my client doesn't want to pull back any further and lose water, which
diminishes what kind of a boat can be put on the end of the dock. And I know that it meets all of the criteria and you know, state federal. We're going to apply for um a chapter 91 license and
the hiber is free to comment on that as well. If the state sees it his way, they won't permit it. But I mean it's it's fully permittable. Permittable, excuse me. >> Okay, that's all I have right now. So M
question. >> Yeah. Okay. Um well, what what we're really talking about is that your client wants the ability to have a bigger boat or be able to use the boat more by being near permanent water all the time. Correct. >> Well, we're in permanent water.
>> Yeah. So, uh I mean what do people do with shorter peers when they have a boat? >> With shorter peers? >> Yeah. >> Well, it depends on where your water is. >> Yeah. >> I mean, ideally, people don't want to be sitting on the mud flats.
>> Well, you know, >> I I mean, it's it's not a matter of what it's it's a matter of what the criteria are and the regulations. And the regulations spell out what needs to be met to permit a dock in a pier system. >> Well, I get that we don't have a length
regulation and that doesn't mean we can't find that appears too long. I mean, there's other issues. There's other neighbors riparian rights. There's the public trust. There's the habitat. Uh uh there's interference with the rights
of others. There's navigation hazards. All those things. the longer the pier, I think all those factors increase. Now, I'm not saying they're all going to happen, but the the probability increases and you know the ha and to
reiterate uh what our chairman has said, the uh harbor master has repeatedly and this is something that's only come up since uh I think someone came in and said uh and we didn't really I think as a board didn't have a full grasp on what
the impact was going to be that it seems like everybody wants to come out now and have the longest disappear and be in so-called permanent water all the time. Um there's uh the the these waters I mean I understand they have riparian rights up
to the high water mark and they have uh the rights to the water. They don't own the water and there's a public trust that I think is the overriding concern is the public trust. waterways are for the uh are to be protected by local,
state, federal governments for the public. Now he when his rights because oh I want a bigger boat in the water all the time whenever I want it kind of bounces up against that and that's how I feel about it.
>> Okay. >> Next. >> Um can I respond to that? >> Sure. Go ahead. >> So it's not the longest pier out there. There are numerous peers that are much longer and
he doesn't this pier will not impair or impede on repairarian rights. Um we have plenty of setback distances. There's almost 7 ft of clearance underneath it if somebody wants to paddle board,
kayak. Our piles are spaced out. Uh the next door neighbor has one. There's I counted them up. There's 40 piles on it. We have 14. So, we're we're low impact on the tidal flats. We have plenty of
clearance underneath it. We have, you know, a fully aluminum decking system that is low impact on the environment. And um
we have access to the water and you know uh there's if you scroll back up the next pier's further out the next pier is further out the the Liberty Marina extends four slips into the into the channel.
You know, it's this is not the pier that's causing an impedance to people accessing the water or or moving, you know, enjoying the waterfront. This is really not the pier
to pick out for doing that. If you want to look further up the river, there's a lot of congestion. Not here. Th this is not up the river. And um we're trying to be protective and
mindful of the environment. If we pull it back a few feet, it doesn't really change the navigational aspect of it. And in terms of the navigation, the Army Cors, you know, guidelines,
they're not um regulation, but they're guidelines. We meet all of those in in not just minimally. We meet them. You know, we have we're not supposed to be 25% of the channel. We're 10%.
And and it's, you know, my pier is only 20 ft long, but I'm never going to get to deep water. So, what's the point? You know, this pier can reach deep water. If I cut it back up here, then I'm sitting on dry
mud. Everything's sitting on dry mud and and you know I'm not sure what the point is honestly and I understand what the harbor master is saying but I I think that the town needs to have
a revision to their regulations that protects the specific things that you're looking at and I don't think that this impedes on it. That's my opinion. >> Thank you. And of all, you know, I've permanented a few docks up and down the river in Danvas and Beverly Salem and
whatnot. You know, aside from maybe Burnham's dock, this this dock has meets everything that you could possibly want for a dock from a regulatory perspective. >> Okay. Mike,
>> yes. Thank you. >> I have a question, but I'm not quite sure it's appropriate. Um, >> go ahead. Go ahead. No, I just wonder, are there any, maybe this is to the staff, is there any aspect of precedent? Is there anything that we'd be approving
here that would lead towards, you know, further longer docks, peers down the road? I don't I honestly don't know. >> No, no, it's excuse me. Um, each project gets evaluated individually on its own. One, we wouldn't use one to set a
precedent for another one. >> Okay. That's it. >> That's it. >> Lorraine, >> I I don't have any questions. I just have a comment. Go >> ahead. They you met the regulations. Um yeah, the is there an issue? We have an
issue. Yes. But that it's the town's issue and um and it's come up before. We've talked about it before. So um I I I think that you followed everything you were supposed to follow. And I know that the harbor master had made had made some recommendations that you also put in
with with curving um you know the the ramp a little bit. So yeah, I I think that you've done everything you could possibly do. I mean, I think it meets it meets all the I not think I know that it meets all the criteria of the regulations and you
know, I hope we have a favorable decision um on this in all aspects. Okay. >> All set, Lorine? >> I'm all set. >> Mary, >> I'm just going to say it meets all the criteria.
>> Thank you. >> It does. We do lack the regulation about these peer links and that that's we know that >> I think the town should well the town has certainly um some opinions
on it and that maybe you should look at your regulations in the future. >> I I think they are but there are competing interests. Uh okay. I think I more or less said my piece that you know um there is no
regulation limiting uh the length and we'll leave it at that for now. Is there any public comment Mr. graded Bill Brad Street telling me remember precinct one. In my lifetime, the river's always been
there. It changes somewhat over more than my lifetime. rules change. We're dealing with the length of peers and what have you. As was stated, I think it's about time
we review and change the rules appropriately before someone changes them for us. It makes it difficult for us to make proper decisions. To me, it's a time element and a update.
And this is not the only uh board in town needs to update their rules. It's just I'm here now and my comment is don't make a decision now that you won't be able to deal with in the future.
I don't know what the period of time is whether it's every five or 10 years or whatever. The rules have to be gone over and revised for whatever. The river is getting uh busier and busier, more and more ws, peers, whatever. I think at
some point uh a review is in order. Does that make sense? >> Mhm. Definitely. >> Okay. Thank you. >> And we're just respond to that if you don't mind, Mr. Chair. I think we going >> well I think they >> consider a moratorum on
>> permitting until we know what we're doing what we're going to do with this. >> So I do have um a meeting coming up with staff as well as with town council to discuss. I mean it wouldn't be relevant to this project. This is already in and submitted. So any changes would not impact this project but it is on our
>> and there'll be another project and another and we're not doing anything. >> We are doing things. We are we're working on it. >> All right. We are Okay. Uh like I said before, uh I do not see a length regulation that uh would allow
us to uh to not approve this project. But uh the applicants I'm sure know with their their adviserss that uh you still have to get to your chapter 91 license and the length of the pier. I'm sure in the
harbor man's comments go as part of that application. >> And I mean I say this for every pier that we approve. I'm not sure where the chapter 91 approvals lie at the moment, but that's a risk that I'm sure you know you're taking. Uh
and that being said, is there any other comments before we put up for a vote? >> We want to move to close the public hearing. And uh there's waivers to be granted. I think >> are there waivers? I don't think >> I didn't even look at the memo. >> Yeah, for the the 35 and the 50.
>> I mean, that one. >> All right. So, the first order of business is closing the public hearing. So, someone can make a motion to do that. >> I'll move to close the public hearing for J 9 Jacobs Landing D file number 14-1445. >> Okay. Now, for waiverss, we have two. We
have first we need to grant a waiver to allow work and the third. >> Can we get a second? >> We need a second on that. >> Let me closing the hearing. >> Oh jeez. Getting ahead of myself. Uh motion been made and seconded. Do we have >> Yeah, I'll second.
>> I Okay, next up we need a motion. >> I thank you. >> See, it's time for a new chair. Um uh next up is a motion to grant a waiver to allow work in the 35 ft no disturb
zone for 9 Jacobs Landing D file number 14-1445. >> I second. >> I'm just asking for a motion. >> You got to make it. Oh, I got to make a motion to grant a waiver to allow work in the 35 ft no disturb zone for 9
Jacobs Landing D number 14-1445. >> I'll second it. >> All in favor? I >> I >> no. >> So that's four to one. >> Four to one. Thank you. >> Okay. Uh next up, we need a motion to grant a waiver to allow work in the
50oot no build zone for nine Jacobs Landing D file number 14-1445. >> I'll make a motion. >> You can just say so moved instead of making the whole motion. Just say so moved. >> Oh, so moved. >> And then someone can say second.
>> Okay. And then um All in favor? >> I I >> No. >> Four to one again. >> Okay. And now a motion to issue an order of conditions for 9 Jacobs Landing D file number 14-1445
with additional conditions as discussed. I think that one of the the additional conditions that the harbor mass has that he wants de um chapter 91 license numbers displayed. >> Yes. Yep. And those are all in our performance standards and that go into every word.
>> Okay. >> So those all be included. >> So moved. >> Have I got that right? >> Yes. Is there a second? >> Second it. >> All in favor? >> I I opposed. >> All right. So be four to one again.
Okay. So you have your order conditions is approved. You have three years to complete the project, go back for a certificate of compliance, and I think there are one-year extensions available if you are not done within the three-year time frame.
>> Providing they come back and >> yes, just please come back before it expires if you need the extension. If if it expires, then >> you have to stop. >> But please come back before it expires if you need more time just in case. >> Okay. Uh going back to old and new
business was a discussion for a chairman change. Uh and I think at our last meeting we had a kind of a >> Thank you very much. >> You're welcome. Good luck. >> Take care. >> Hopefully the warm weather comes sooner than later for you. >> Friday.
>> Yeah. Uh at our last meeting we discussed um it's time to rotate the chair and I think uh we've asked several members. Mike was not interested. >> No, no, no. >> And Lorraine was not and Mary seems says
she is interested and it just works out that Mary is probably the shortest remaining time in her term. So that's probably a good reason to make her the chairperson. >> Yeah. Uh, that being said, I think we just need a nomination and we'll vote on
it and then >> All right. I nominate uh Mary for chair. >> Mary Height. >> Mary Height. Yes. Although I don't think I'm pronouncing that right. >> Height. Height. >> Height. Mary Height. I nominate Mary Height as chair as the new chair for the conservation commission.
>> Lorraine seconds it. >> All in favor? >> I. >> Congratulations, Mary. >> Hi, Mary. I really don't. >> Now that letter ahead will have you as chairperson. >> Oh god. >> You have to be available for quotes.
Call the news organiz. >> Okay. So make a motion to adjourn. >> No, he's just kidding. You don't have to talk to me. >> Oh, I'm sorry. Before we do that, is there anything else that we >> um next meeting is January 22nd. We have two agenda items. It's 80 Water Street that got continued and then 20 Chevrolet
for a new NOI. >> Yeah, >> the one that we just saw today. Yeah, we saw >> they have an open order of conditions already. Can they have two open order conditions simultaneously? >> Yeah, because it's for two different projects. >> Different uh >> Okay. >> projects. >> Okay. Uh someone make a motion to
adjurnn. >> I move that we adjourn. >> Good enough. >> All in favor? >> I >> Okay. Thank you all everybody. Congratulations.