Heat. Heat. Good evening. Welcome to the March 25th, 2026 meeting of the Falmouth Conservation Commission. This meeting is being held virtually via Zoom video conference and is also being broadcast
by FCTV on cable channel 9. As this meeting is being recorded by Zoom and broadcast by FCTV, please be cognizant of what you say, how you say it, and what can be seen and heard in your background. We are missing just one commissioner, but we have a quorum and are moving
forward. I would like to remind the commissioners that for commenting I will call on each of you in turn. So please refrain from speaking over each other. Also all votes are done by roll call. So when I call your name please state your name and your vote for the record even if you
made the motion or the second. To our public attendees at any time during this meeting you may enter any comments or questions via the chat function. At the appropriate time they will be read into the record. If as an attendee you'd like to participate in a particular hearing, let us know via the chat function. Then
at the appropriate time, you will be promoted to the hearing as a participant. When you are selected, you must have your video enabled, be succinct, and respectful of others. Public comments will be limited to three minutes each. Regarding RDAs, under a request for
determination of applicability, the applicant is asking the commission to determine if the provisions of the Massachusetts Wetland Protection Act or the Falmouth Wetlands bylaws apply to their proposed project. A negative determination is that the provisions of
the act and or bylaws do not apply. Therefore, the project may proceed as proposed. A positive determination means the provisions of the act and or bylaw do in fact apply and or may require some conditions. Therefore, the project would require a notice of intent application.
So, as an applicant, you want to hear a negative determination. For the benefit of anybody waiting for a particular hearing and so that you're not waiting unsuccess necessarily, the following hearings are expected to be continued. 42 Squibnocket Drive, East
Fmouth, Mass. Chappie Yach Club, Inc. 501c3, West Falmouth Harbor, West Falmouth, Mass and 1209 East Falmouth Highway, East Falmouth, Mass. All right. First on the agenda is vote
minutes. We'll start with voting on the minutes for March 4th, 2026. >> Mr. Chairman, may I make a motion to approve the minutes of March 4th patent? Second Driscoll >> hearing a
motion and a second. Any questions? Hearing none, vote the call for March 4th. Dave >> D. I >> Dan >> Walsh. I >> Ron >> Driscoll I. >> Steve >> I. >> Ronnie
>> Wman I. >> Dan Duffy I. March 4th minutes have been accepted. Next, we vote on accepting the minutes from March 11th, 2026. >> Make a motion to approve the minutes of March 11th, 2026. Driscoll
>> Bowman second. >> We have a motion, a second. Any questions here? I'll call the role. Dave >> tai. >> Dan >> Walshy. >> Ron. >> Fiscal. Eye. Ronnie >> Bman I.
>> Steve >> abstain. >> And Duffy I. Motion passes to accept the minutes from March 11, 2026. Next. March 16th, 2026 minutes. >> Make a motion to approve the minutes from March 16, 2026. Driscoll
>> Balman. Second. >> A motion is made and seconded. Any questions? Hearing none. I'll call the role. Dave Tentai. >> Dan Walshai. Ronald >> Ronald I
>> Ronny and Duffy I patent abstain. The motion the minutes for March 16th have been um accepted. Next we have a request for continuence under a notice of intent. Anthony Aini Jr. and Elena
Aini 42 Squibnocket Drive East Falmouth Mass for permission to reconstruct the training walls steps a deck and patio restore the coastal bank and install restoration and mitigation plantings. Jen >> yes Mr. Chairman uh the applicant is
requesting a continuence until March 8th. >> No, I'm sorry. March uh not I don't even know what I was just reading. April 15th. >> Close enough. >> Yeah. >> All right. make a motion to continue this hearing and I mean continue the
notice of intent uh to 4:15 26 >> second. >> All right. Any questions? All right. Call the role. Dave >> I >> Dan >> Walsh. >> Ron >> Driscoll I >> Steve
>> I >> Ronnie >> I >> and Duffy. Motion to move the continue the hearing till April what? 15th you said or >> 15th >> 15th >> April 15th has been passed. Next request for continues under a notice of intent.
Mike Jackson chaffquitic yach club bank 501c3 westmouth harbor westmouth mass for permission to install three seasonal floats in westmouth harbor. Jen >> yes Mr. Chairman the applicant is requesting a continuence until April
1st. Okay, >> make a motion to continue the hearing until April 1st, 226. Driscoll >> Bowman second. >> Motion a second. Any questions? Hearing none. Call the roll. Dave
>> ti. >> Dan. >> Walsh. I >> Ron >> Bisclly. >> Ronnie >> Walman. I >> Steve >> and I. >> And Duffy. I motion to continue till April 1 has been accepted. Next, we got a request for a continuance
for certification of compliance. Timothy Liam, Trustees, RNG Reality Trust, 1209 East Falmouth Highway, East Falmouth, Mass. Request for a partial certificate of compliance for Mass D-4524. Jen,
>> yes, Mr. Chairman. Um, the applicant is requesting a continuance until May 13th. So, do we know what's going what's the cause of the delay? >> Um, we have a salt marsh that we need to determine if it it's surviving. Um, they
need to determine if it was planted correctly. Um, we're waiting on that. >> Thank you. >> Make a motion to continue the hearing until May >> 13th 26. >> Correct. 13th. >> Balman second.
>> Motion and a second. Any questions? Hearing none, I will call the role. Dave, >> I >> Dan, >> Ron, >> I >> Steve, >> Ronnie, >> I. >> And Duffy, I motion to continue till May
13th is passed. All right. Next, we've got a request for determination of applicability. First up, George R. Collins 114 Edgewater Drive East Falmouth Mass for permission to reset an an existing dock piling.
Alyssa >> staff recommends a negative two under the state and bylaw. Resource area boundaries are not confirmed. >> Driscoll so moved. Wman second. >> A motion and a second. Any questions? Hearing none. I will call the role. Dave
>> Danti. >> Dan ally. >> Ron >> Driscoll. Ronnie I >> Steve >> and I >> and Duffy I motion passes. Next Doug Mullen 37 5gate lane found
with mass for permission to construct two dormers. Lissa >> staff recommends a negative three under the state and negative -2 under the bylaw. Resource area boundaries are not confirmed. >> So moved. Driscoll >> second. >> Got a motion in a second. Any questions
hearing? None. Call the role. Dave >> Tentai, >> Dan >> Bolshai, >> Ron >> Disco, >> Ronnie >> Bulman I >> Steve >> Patton I >> and Duffy I motion passes. Next Michael
Waterby 43 and 45 Gunning Point A Fm with Mass for permission to replace existing timber decks with stone patios, install a fire pit, reconfigure driveway and install a catch basin. Melissa >> staff recommends a negative three under the state and a negative two under the
bylaw. Resource certain boundaries are not confirmed. >> So move Driscoll second. >> All right, we got a motion and a second. Any questions? >> It's just a lot of work for a determination of applicability. Is it?
>> Sorry, I wasn't one to review it, Ron. So, let me just look at it. >> Sorry. >> No worries. Is this Dunning Point? >> Yeah, it seems like just some hardcape um replacement. >> Oh, it's a replacement. Okay.
>> Yeah, there's already decks. >> Yeah, the decks are being replaced with with patios. Yeah, >> but there's two still cut. Okay. You're okay with it? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. It seems like everything's pretty far away from the bank. So, it's I don't
think there will be much, you know, debris in the resource area. >> Okay. Do I have >> We made a motion, didn't we? >> Yes. >> Do we need a motion? >> I think we already did that for this one.
>> It was a question. Yeah, it was a question after. >> Okay. Sorry. All right. We'll call the roll. Dave >> Kai >> Dan >> Paul >> Ron >> Ronnie >> and I
>> Steve >> and Duffy motion passes. Next we have Scott Mile 41 High Street Fmouth Mass for permission to install a new title 5 sewer disposal system. Alyssa >> that recommends a negative three under the state and negative -2 under the
bylaw. Resource area boundaries are not confirmed. >> Driscoll so moved. Bman second. >> Motion was second has been made. Any questions? >> Hearing none, I will call the roll. Dave, >> can I >> Dan >> Walsh? I
>> Ron >> Ronnie >> Bmani. >> Steve. >> Dan Di. Motion passes. Next. Francis J. Zinci, trustee of Francis J. Zinci Living Trust, 24 Edgewater Drive, East Falmouth, for
permission to permit an existing dock. Alyssa >> staff recommends a negative two under the state and bylaw. Resource area boundaries are not confirmed. >> All right, Driscoll. So moved. >> That second. >> All right, got a motion a second. Any
questions on this one? Hearing none. Call RO. Dave >> Tai. >> Dan. >> Walsh. >> Ron >> I. >> Ronnie. >> Woman. I >> Steve >> and I. >> And Duffy. I motion passes. Next, James
Bergus 296 quiset a found with mass for permission to reinforce a structure with helical piles. >> Staff recommends a negative two under the state and bylaw. Resource area boundaries are not confirmed. >> Driscoll moved.
>> Bman second. >> Is that a motion or second? Any questions? Hearing none, I'll call RO. Dave, >> can I? Dan >> Ron >> I >> Ronnie >> I >> and Steve
>> and I >> and Duffy I motion passes. Next we have a continued request for determination of applicability. First one Keith Tibetan Court 77 Sanuit Road found with mass for permission to
install a new title 5 sewage disposal system. Lissa >> staff recommends a negative three under the state and negative2 under the bylaw. Resource area boundaries are not confirmed. >> So moved Bowman second. >> I got a motion on a second. Any
questions hearing? None. I'll call the role. Dave >> Dan >> Ronai. >> Ronnie. >> Steve. >> And Duffy. Motion passes. Next, Cronin Reality Trust, 23
Northborns Pond Road, Falmouth, Mass, for permission to install restoration plantings in accordance with mass DP number 25-646. Alyssa. >> Um, yes. So, the staff's recommendation of a positive four under the state and a
positive five under the bylaw are still proposed. Uh, the quorum for this one excludes Dan. The applicants are here um to proceed with their continued hearing. >> Okay. >> So I am going to promote Mr. Chairman
Lynn Hamlin up. >> Okay. >> Would like to say a few words. >> Is Brian here too? >> Y I think Brian Wall is here too. Yep. I just promoted him, Lynn. >> Okay.
>> Yeah, he's coming. >> Okay, I'll let him start. >> And also, Jen Jennifer, if you didn't get the um note, um could you promote the property owners? >> Sure. What is the property owner name? I'm sorry.
>> Susan Carol and Chris Heisenberg. >> Susan Carol. They're probably coming in from two different um sources. >> Yeah. Um I don't What's the other name, Lynn? >> Maybe Chris isn't there, but Chris Heisenberg.
>> I don't see a Chris Heisenberg. >> It might just be Susan. >> Yeah, we got Susan. Susan wants to say a few words. So, >> okay. Well, I'll uh Brian, are you gonna start? >> Yes. Uh thank you through the chair. Uh good evening and good evening members of
the commission. Uh for the record, my name is Brian Wall. I'm an attorney and I represent the applicants tonight together with Lynn Hamlin from Hamlin Consulting and as we indicated um the property owner Susan Carol has joined us and would like to say a few words. Um
before you is an RDA which proposes native plantings in the buffer zone. And just by way of a little bit of background um the property is located at 23 North Bourne Pond Road. the former owners of the property um passed away
and as a result the estate put the property up for sale last year. Our clients, our current clients um Susan Carol and Chris Heisenberg entered into a purchase and sale agreement to buy the property, but during the due diligence period, it was discovered that there was
a 40-year-old order of conditions recorded against the property and it had no certificate of compliance. So, the former owner, the estate, hired Lynn Hamlin and then ultimately myself, and we now work for the current owners,
um, to look into the matter. And I'm going to just give this background. Lynn's going to deal with the details. Lynn discovered that what was missing from the old order was some native plantings in the buffer zone. The estate was obviously trying to sell the
property and so we thought the most expeditious way to deal with this was to file an RDA seeking a negative determination to enable planting of the native plants in the buffer zone. And our further thinking was that once the
plantings were installed, we would ask for compliance and obviously there would be a compliance process with your staff and with the commission. Further, our reasoning behind the approach of the RDA was the following. Planting native species in a buffer zone
under the state wetlands protection act is called a minor activity and it's actually fully exempt from the wetlands protection act. So thinking that this is a determination of applicability, obviously the law does not apply to an
exempt activity. So we thought we could get a negative determination under the state act. Similarly, under your regulations, planting native species is deemed to be what's called a moderate activity and is presumptively not to
have any adverse impacts against wetland resource areas. So again, we're thinking that it's a moderate activity, no adverse impact. The commission could make a negative determination. So, we appeared before the commission on December 3rd, 2025, and we presented the
RDA, but due to the way that RDAs are processed compared to NOIs, the commissioners did not know it was coming and did not have an opportunity to go out and visit the site. And in addition, the staff had several comments um including some about the proposed plant
species. So, we requested a continuence to allow the commissioners an opportunity to go look at the site. We also um met with staff. And actually, let me back up. In the meantime, the property was sold. Um Susan and Chris
bought the property. And since then, um we met with the staff. Lynn has made some adjustments to the plan, which she'll she'll address. Um, and we had the property staked to facilitate a site visit by the commissioners. Lynn and I
also met with the staff uh by Zoom earlier this week and went over um the RDA. We understand that staff is of the opinion that there should be an NOI, but again, our position remains the same. We we consider this a simple way um to take
care of a simple problem having some plantings put into the buffer zone. And again, it's exempt under the state act and it's presumed not to have an adverse effect under the bylaws. So, what we're asking for is a negative five under the
act. If you look at the um form, the WPA form two, a negative five is that it's an exempt activity, which we think that it is. And under the bylaw, we're requesting a negative -2, which is a finding that the proposed work is in your jurisdiction, but it will not
result in removal, filling, dredging, or alteration of the area. I'm very happy to answer questions. I wanted to give that background. I'm going to turn it over, if I may, to Lynn Hamlin to discuss the plan details. And again, when we're finished with our presentation, Susan would like to say a
few words to the commission. And then we're very happy to answer any questions that you might have. Good, good evening. Um, I revised the plan in response to staff's concerns about some of the species that were chosen. I think we had
an initial discussion um, regarding the number of trees that staff would like to have seen in the restoration area. The restoration area comprises 610 square ft which will fill back in with naturalized
or native plantings the 25- ft buffer that was supposed to have remained undisturbed. Um I know that um the administrator's concern was that the existing trees and I did an inventory of those trees based on staff comments at
one of our site visits. Um but the administrator's concern was that those trees had been so pruned by the original owners that they wouldn't be able to go back to their um canopy size. So we retained Paul Sellers which I
believe the commission is familiar with. These are Massachusetts certified arberist to do an assessment of the existing trees in a corrective pruning schedule which I submitted. I hope everybody had a chance to look at um his
findings were as I had represented that there are sufficient number of trees in the buffer or there are significant number of trees in the buffer that can be correctively pruned so they will um be restored to a tree formation versus a
shrub formation that they're in now. Um so in light of that um that plant community is missing in a diverse shrub species. So I chose to plant the area with a multiple number of shrubs of
different species suitable for a coastal setting. I know that um staff based on yesterday's meeting still had a problem with the St. John's wart and I have no problem switching that out. Actually their comments were interesting. Um, apparently they have some study sites
using that and I look forward to their um, findings on those study sites. So, this current plan because I submitted it the 18th or prior to the 18th and our meeting wasn't until yesterday, we can easily easily switch out the St. John's
wart um, where I now show it. Um, I think I'll keep it short and and try to answer questions if you have any, but I I hope that you refer to Paul Celler's report in the new revised plan. The revised plan stated March 2nd.
>> Susan, did you want to say a few words? >> Ryan, good evening everyone. Um, I I'll keep it brief. I just want to introduce myself. My husband Chris and I are the new owners of this property. So I know when the property was before you all in December, we weren't part of it since we
didn't own it. Um but uh we are we grew up in Mass and it's been our lifelong dream to own a home in Felmouth and make it our year-round residence. So, I just wanted to let you all know as the new owners, we so look forward to working with all of you to receiving your
guidance and to working expeditiously with your guidance to bring this property into full compliance because we're super excited to be in Falmouth and certainly want this property be property to be in compliance with, you know, all your concerns. So, thanks again.
>> Thank you. Um, Jen. >> Yes, Mr. Chairman. Um, we have been requesting a notice of intent on this property since July of last year. It's not simply putting in native plantings. These are restoration plantings that
need to be conditioned. Um, also stump sprout management we've never done under uh an RDA that also needs to be conditioned. And there were um other items, outstanding items on the property
um that we had uh identified such as dry wells and an extra float that was stored on the salt marsh by the prior um owners. We wanted to make sure that the salt marsh came back that actually might need some help, might need restoration
plugs put in. We just don't know. So that is why we are um recommending a positive. >> Thank you. Alyssa, do you have anything to add? >> Not at this time. Thank you.
>> All right. I will open it up for um commissioners for questions. So I'll start with you Dave. >> I just have one question. Um uh Lynn, you mentioned um pruning in such a way that a tree could come back to a canopy
uh configuration. I'm I'm surprised pruning could accomplish that. Can you say a little more about that? >> Yeah, we've we've I've seen that done quite a bit. Um so what they do I mean I'm not the certified arborist so we retained one so you'd have a credible
source but I've seen them do it. So what happens when you cut a tree or prune a tree for view? You aren't paying much attention to the branching and the structure of the tree. So what the arborist does is he picks a leader and he uh facilitates the growth of that
leader by pruning the suckers that have sprouted up from the repeated pruning of historic years. So they cultivate a leader so that that tree can start growing back again to its tree form to perform a um to form a canopy. I've I've
seen it done it. It works pretty well. >> Interesting. >> Yeah. And Mr. >> That's all I have. Yeah. >> Um Mr. Cellers predicted that these would double in height in about five years. >> Interesting. Thank you. That's all I have. Ron,
>> folks that I'm sorry you asked me. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I'm sorry. I don't have any questions at this point. Thank you. >> All right. Uh Ronnie, >> uh thank you, Brian. Thank you, Lynn and Susan. Um I see I went to the property today. It's my first time out there. Um
I met I think I believe your husband. Um >> and did a quick walk through. I really appreciate you guys trying to clean up a mess that doesn't is not your mess. Um, but there is a process that we need to do and I think the NOI is the next step and I think you need more information
and he was talking about maybe putting a rinse station and I think all that would need to be included and we could clean that up at at the end. >> Thanks Ron. Steve. Yeah, Jen, could you tell me again what
your major concern is at this point? >> There's 610 square feet of restoration plantings that need to be put in and should be conditioned to be allowed to remain in their full and mature form. The sprout, the stump sprout would probably um that they're going to be
constantly working on that bank over the next couple of years. So, I don't know how that's not alteration to a bank, but you know, we'd like to condition that work. Um, we need to check the salt marsh to make sure the salt marsh returns after having a float stored on it by the prior property owner. Um,
drywalls need to be installed. Um, there was just several items outstanding items um, related to compliance that we wanted to see in the notice. Um, Ronnie, thank you for sharing that a rinse station is being contemplated because this is the
first we're hearing of it. Um, so there there are a number and we were told that they were not uh that the property owners were not um contemplating any more improvements to the outside of the property. So again, I really do think it just needs to be a notice.
>> I if I could address that, Jen, I'm sorry. I think when at least uh Ron my understanding from my husband is when there was a discussion about whether this would have to be notice of intent u they had a discussion about do you want to change the footprint and he said which is rightfully consistent we don't
we love this house we know it needs work but we are not looking for it to be bigger we're just looking for it to be compliant so we're not envisioning immediate changes other than the fact that if for some reason this commission feels that there is a notice of intent needed then our understanding is over
the course of three years or longer, you can, you know, I guess it's a three-year thing where you could get a permit for something even if you don't choose to do it originally. But we are not seeking to do any improvements that are not permitted or do anything that's not consistent with your guidance. We just
want to do what we need to do and we're excited to get your guidance and make this home compliant. >> Thank you, Miss Carol. Our guidance has been Please file a notice of intent. >> That's all, Mr. Chairman. >> Okay. >> Thank you. I'm just I just have one
question. Is is there a reason why there's reluctant to file in a way? Just curious. >> I I I'd like to answer that question if I may, Mr. Chairman. Of course, >> so it began kind of from a set of circumstances. So, as I was indicating,
the estate had the property on for sale and we thought the RDA would be the quickest way because you know that when there's an NOI, there has to be a a survey engineered plan and there has to be notification of a butterers and all there's there's a lot more information
that goes with a with an NOI. So then um after the scope of the what was needed to come into compliance became more clear, Susan and Chris decided to take the risk and buy the property. So they understand that they bought a property that's not in compliance, but they
inherited the RDA and so they wanted to see it through because all the work had been done. We had had an initial hearing before you and as I've said and Lynn said, we still believe that this can be approved under an RDA. But furthermore, I'd like to just very respectfully point
out a couple of things. It seems like the gist of staff's comments are there are restoration plants and need to be conditioned and there's things about this rinse station, but I would remind the commission all that is before you is a proposal to plant 610 or 605 square ft
of native plantings. All of these plantings are in the zone A. So once they go in, they can't be touched. It's a no touch zone. Um, and furthermore, there's also a compliance process that once this is done, if you see fit to give us the negative determination and
the work is actually done, the plants have to take root and staff has the ability to make sure that there's compliance. And if the staff wants to withhold compliance until they're comfortable with the plants, they can do that. We're not trying to escape anything. We just thought this was a
very appropriate way to do a rather simple thing and help out the property owner to get through this process and move on. And I would suggest if you look at what's before you planting plants in a buffer zone, it's very simple. It really is. We don't think an NOI is
necessary. >> Well, thank you for that explanation. Alrighty. Um, did you get Steve? Did you get Steve? >> Yeah, I wasn't I wasn't quite finished, but thank you. Okay, Ronnie.
>> Steve, you're on mute. >> I had that question that led to a ongoing discussion. Um, so, okay. So, I understand what your concern is. Um but the petition
is that we need to monitor the planning the 600 square feet to Jan I'm sorry um to condition the plantings remain and you know um and be allowed to grow into
their full and mature form to condition the sp the stump sprout. Um, I know Brian wants to stick to those topics, but you know, when we when we went out to um the site, there was a float on a marsh, so we want to make sure the marsh
is okay. >> Okay, I got it. Thank you. >> Okay. If I could just address that, >> we're we're um we're there's a I'm being redundant with what Brian said, but
there's a whole opportunity to talk about the certificate of compliance, which hasn't been filed, and I have a lot to say about the items in the certificate of compliance that staff's finding non-comp non-compliant, but it's it's expanding the scope of this simple
application. So, we can talk about the marsh, but that's not on application tonight. And we can talk about whether drywalls were ever conditioned on on um order of conditions from 40 plus years ago, but we're not talking about that tonight. I'm not prepared to talk about
that or I don't want to protract this hearing into something that's not relevant. All we're here tonight is simply to plant some native plants. And personally, I wouldn't ask for the certificate of compliance until those plants are established. Um, and a staff
could deny it based on a multiple reasons, but we're not seeking a certificate of compliance tonight. We're simply seeking to plant native plants in a buffer zone. >> Thank you. All right,
commissioners. It's your pleasure. Oh, Dave, >> uh, a question for Jen. Jen, are you uncomfortable with just go. I know there are other issues, but are you uncomfortable with just going with
the narrower tonight? Do we have to compile include all the other issues as well or can we just go with the plantings as being as as being suggested here? Is there is a reason why you don't want to go with just the plantings right now? >> I would say that the planting 610
uh square feet of restoration plantings do need to be conditioned. So, even if you're strictly talking about the plantings in the stump sprout of the bank, I would still say uh our recommendation is a positive because they're restoration plantings going in
an A's buffer zone and you usually quite frequently condition those types of projects >> and we can't condition of course we can't condition an RDA is no is there procedure. >> Okay, >> that's not actually true. Um, if I could
say something about that, you could give a negative -3. And if you look at the form, it says, um, a negative3 is the work described in the request is within the buffer zone, but will not alter an area subject to dur jurisdiction. And then it says, therefore, said work does
not require an NOI subject to the following conditions. And there's a spot to put in conditions. So, you could give a negative three if you wanted to. If if you cite the plan which you will have to site on the plan um I have
failed plantings had to be had to be replaced to a 90% survival and then you're approving the plan which by virtue is approving that condition. >> Okay. Well, thank you guys. I know what
the uh the staff uh still sticking to what their recommendations are. So, um, if anybody wants to make a motion on this, yeah, >> I will entertain one. >> I'm not exactly sure what the motion should be right right now. >> Um,
>> well, if you like it, you'd make Well, the motion is a positive one, so you would move to accept >> a I'll make a move to accept the the recommendations of the staff as a
positive on this. Um, determination of applicability. Driscoll. >> I have a second. >> Second. >> All right. So, I have a motion and a second. So, we'll call the role. Dave,
>> uh, how do we vote? Uh, positive or negative, is that how we vote? >> If you don't want it to go through with Oh, Jen. >> So, Dave, if you want to accept staff's recommendation and require a notice of intent, you say can't I. If you want to
allow the negative determination in the plantings to go under an RDA, you say can't no. Can't I? >> Okay. Ron >> Driscoll I >> Ronnie >> Palman and I
>> Steve >> Ben I >> and Duffy it's unanimous to accept staff's recommendation of a positive determination. Um I'll leave uh next steps up to Jen.
>> Yes. So, we will be in touch with um Attorney Wall and Miss Amlin on next steps. >> Okay. We thank the commission for listening to our position. We we do appreciate your time. >> Thank you. >> Have a good night. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Susan.
>> I'll be back a little later. >> Okay. >> Okay, Miss Carol, I'm going to put you back into attendees. Give me one second. Mr. Chairman, >> roll to attendee. Let me grab Miss
Carol. There you are. Roll to attendee. >> All right. >> And Brian. >> So then next time we see this u this property, it's going to be under a notice of intent. >> Yes. >> All right. So
all hearings of the Felmouth Conservation Commission regarding NOIs are held simultaneously under the authorities of the Massachusetts Wetland Protection Act and the Falmouth Wetland bylaws. Although a single decision of the commission is issued if represented a sing separate decision under each
authority. As a reminder, public commenting is limited to three minutes. So, I encourage you to stay within the purview of this board, which are the rules and regulations of the Wetlands Protection Act and the Falmouth Wetlands bylaws and how they pertain to a particular application. The chair reserves the right to stop any
commenting that is disparaging or inconsequential to the hearing. Please know that all correspondences received by the conservation department is forwarded to all commissioners and becomes part of the record. We will not read each and every letter received at a hearing. Remember, our jurisdiction is
that of the Massachusetts Wetland Protection Act and the Falmouth Wetland bylaws, not zoning, health, or building. All right. So, under request for hearing under notice intent, we have Jonathan Hamilton 91 Moxic Road found with Mass
for permission to raise an existing dwelling, construct a new dwelling with attached garage and porches, and to install drywalls and mitigation plantings. Jen Yes, Mr. Chairman, I have promoted the property owner, Mr. Hamilton, up to
present his project. Mr. Hamilton, you need to turn your video and audio on. And to do that, go into the bottom left corner of your screen and an audio. There you go. And
we can see you. Can you say something, sir? Uh, good evening everybody. >> There we go. We can hear you as well. Mr. Chairman, I'm going to be sharing my screen for the applicant. Um, >> go ahead. >> I'm going to bring this one up first.
This is the plan you all have. Um, and then we did get an updated plan um, either today or yesterday. We had asked John Doyle to go out and do some additional survey work and I'll bring
that plan up as well later on. So, um I'm just here to share the plan. >> All right, sir. You can uh present your work. >> Uh good evening. My name is Jonathan Hamilton. I'm looking to raise an
existing dwelling at 91 Mtox Road and rebuild uh with attached garage and porches. Um, I will be installing uh drywall on either corner uh for rain runoff. Um, we'll be putting up some
erosion control uh doing some mitigation plantings and that's about it. >> Mr. Chairman, if I could jump in. This is the existing house right here. >> Yep. This is the new house being
proposed. It is moving no closer than the existing house. >> Uh the mitigation plantings are down here. >> Um we do have some concerns. There has been now I'm
going to stop sharing and share a different plan. the one that John sent today. So, we have just a few just a few
comments on this project. It's pretty straightforward. Um John picked up this area of clearing it. Also, if you've been to the site, this area over here, maybe not the whole area, but a part of this area has been
cleared. Sir John did stake it and you saw that that clearing was on your property. >> So, that is on my property now, but it wasn't my property when it was cleared. It was the neighbor's property. >> Yeah. >> I'm happy to replant that with cedar
trees or whatever you guys suggest I replant it with. >> Okay. And all the stuff that's being stored right here, I think there was a a trailer of some sort or something like that. Is that stuff going to be moved somewhere else or you plan on keeping it
in this area? >> I would like to keep it there. I don't really have anywhere else to put it. >> Okay. Okay. So, we might we can work with the applicant, Mr. Chairman, to kind of come up with some additional replanting
areas. Um does can I stop sharing? >> You can. >> Okay. Our our only concern was like just the the clearing that had taken place in the buffer and we can work with the applicant on on developing a a plan to
restore that area. >> Excellent. All right. I'll open it up commissioners for any questions for the applicant. Dan, >> no questions. Sounds like a good plan. Ron, >> the mitigation area. Why? Why? Why is
there a mitigation area? Is it is a porch in the going to the buffer zone? Is is that it? >> No, there was just an increase in imperous surface, Ron. >> Okay. >> Yeah. I don't I don't think John has it on. Yeah,
>> that wasn't on the plan, was it? >> It was. Here, I can share again and show you. It's in the bottom. It's in the new plan. It's in the bottom >> left. I don't know if it was on his original plan. Let me check. Yeah, on the original plan that you guys
Yeah. bottom left hand corner, he has his mitigation calcs. >> Okay. All right. I'm all set. Thanks, Steve. >> No, I don't have any questions. Good luck, Jonathan. >> Thank you, >> Ronnie. >> Ditto.
>> Dave, >> I'm all set. Thanks. >> And I am all set, too. All right. Um, >> make a motion to issue a order of conditions. >> Nope. You're making a motion to close the hearing.
>> Close the hearing. Sorry. >> Bowman second. >> All right. We had a motion on a second to close the hearing and take it under advisement. Any questions? Seeing none, I'll call the role again. >> All shine. >> Wait. Steve, did you raise your hand?
>> No. I just didn't we look at this a year ago or so? Dan, >> I don't remember. >> I don't think so. There's another Moxic Road is across the street. >> It's on a little further down the road.
>> We did see one recently where there was a very, very small house that's been pushed back. And then there was the one that was very close to >> Never mind. >> I was sure I was in that driveway before. >> Okay. >> All right. So, Ron,
>> you have two wheel drive. We remember these things. >> I >> Ronnie >> Bulman I >> Dave >> Kai >> and Duffy I motion passes to close the hearing take it under consent. Thank you Mr. Hamilton. >> Thank you Mr. Hamilton. What happens
next sir is the board will vote an order of conditions at their next hearing um and we will issue that order to you. Okay. >> Okay. When is the next hearing? >> Next week. Yeah. >> Next week. April 1st. >> Okay, great.
>> Okay, >> thank you very much. >> You're welcome. >> Not a problem. Have a good night. >> Bye. >> Bye. Next we have Stephen and Susan Burn, 55 Gro Street, Felmouth, Mass for after the fact approval for the reconstruction of a retaining wall and perish permission
to construct an addition reconstruct a portion of a house, remove an unpermitted patio, permit the unpermitted driveway expansion and stone walls and install mitigation plantings. Jen. >> Yes. I have promoted Bill Collie from Collie Site Services to present his
project. >> Bill, you with us? >> You over there? >> There you are. >> Okay. Um, good evening, Bill. >> Do you need me to share my plan for you or you going to do that? >> I would like to share the plan of the
proposed site plan. >> Okay. please. >> Okay. Do you want to share? >> You want me to do that for you, Bill? >> Uh, if you could, please. >> Yeah, not a problem. I'll do that. >> Hang on. I got you uploaded, too. Give me one second.
Where's the plan? Whoa. I mean, if it's easier, I can do it. >> She's doing it. >> Okay. >> I got it. >> Okay. Uh, I got it for you, Bill. >> I'm getting there, guys. Sorry.
Okay. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, Okay. My name is Bill Collie of Collie Site Services. Uh we prepared this plan for Stephen and Susan Burns of 55 Grove
Street. Um there are two or three issues I'd like to talk about. This job initially started out as a small proposed addition uh 6 foot by uh 12 1/2 ft. also raising
this back end of the house because they want to put a full foundation in there to continue there. They are going to be taking the roof off just to reconfigure the the floor space on the second floor, but it's not expanding. Um, okay. Uh so
that was the initial part as we became aware of as the project was moving forward that this existing patio in the back was never permitted. So that we are planning on removing it.
The also on the front side, the stone wall was there used to be an existing concrete wall uh across the southern along Grove Street there.
Back in 2010 or 11, unknowingly, he wanted to expand his parking because it was very limited. It was just one small alleyway like 9 ft uh across in here and he wanted to expand uh his
parking area which he did and he at the time he was unaware of it. Someone had told him he did not need a permit. He was didn't understand that this was in the concom jurisdiction. So,
uh, what we're proposing is instead of removing the wall and going back to the existing concrete wall is to allow the parking space to stay, we've uh, since it's within that salt marsh area. As you
can see, we calculated the square footage out here at uh 311 square ft that was altered and we allowed for 3 to one mitigation on that. Okay. Um, also as far as the proposed
addition, it's 77 square ft that we allowed two to one mitigation on because it's in the zone um what is it zone A or area top buffer area? No, it's in the
buffer B. Uh so we a total of mitigation was uh,090 square ft that we proposed. Um the only place we could put it was along the east side because we still
have to maintain 10 ft from the house. So, we put the mitigation along the east side of the lot and then onto the northern and western area of the lot. Um, so we allowed for a,090 square ft of
mitigation. We added dry wells in be uh to capture water runoff because currently it just drains down. So the feeling is by adding in the dry wells to capture uh capture
all the roof runoff uh we're actually helping the lot in the sense that now it will uh it won't adversely impact the salt marsh across the street from any type of runoff. We're capturing it all. Uh
I believe we've addressed all the major issues as far as this project is concerned and we're just uh uh it was brought up we have changed some plans. We provide another uh
mitigation plan. So but um I believe we've addressed all the issues that need to be. Thank you. Thank you, Mr.
J. I think you can stop sharing. >> Um, >> any comments >> only that we want to switch out some of the mitigation for shrubs, not grasses. >> Correct. Yeah, the three uh you had mentioned the aster, golden rod, and
blue stem. >> Yep. We'll switch those out. We'll work with Bill to to switch up his plan, but other than that, I don't believe we have any additional concerns. >> Perfect. Melissa, anything from you? >> Perfect. All right. Commission
Commissioner comments. Uh Ronnie, any questions? >> No. >> Ron? >> No, I'm all set. If if we're all set with the plantings, it's a tight spot. There's not much you can do. Um good to work it out. Thanks. That's all, Steve.
Steve, you're >> muted. Steve, >> you're muted. >> I don't have any questions. Thank you very much. >> All righty, Dave. >> I'm all set. Thanks, >> Dan. >> I only have one. I think I think I read in the in the really lengthy description
of the project that the mitigation was only for going to be managed for one season. I thought we were trying to do multiple seasons on things unless it's sort of been addressed in other discussions. I think that's what it says in the document. >> Are you asking me that question?
>> As far as I know has to be maintained for what is it a three-year period that they >> I think it's a three-year period and I think I read one season. That's because that's my note is it says one season. I don't I didn't write down the page number where it says it. But >> if it was that was an error.
>> Okay. All right. Well, as long as it's corrected, then that's fine. It's probably in the back in your description and not in the form itself. But that's okay. You can find it later or search for it and just find it. >> Thank you. And I get no more questions.
So I will uh take a motion to close the hearing. Driscoll >> and second. >> All right. A motion to close the hearing and take it under advisement. The motion's been made in second. Any questions? >> Hearing none. I will call the roll. Ronnie >> Bowman. I
>> Ron. >> Friscoll. I >> Steve >> Patton I. >> Dave >> D. I >> Dan >> Walsh. I >> and Duffy. I motion passes to close the hearing. Take it under advisement. Thank you Mr. Collie. >> Thank you very much. Have a good night.
Me too. >> Okay. >> All right. Next we have Mary Lee Carol 23 Zel Street Fmouth Mass for permission to reconstruct and lengthen the existent reb.
>> Yes, Mr. Chairman. I am promoting Chuck Roland of Capeen Islands Engineering up to present his project. >> Chuck, you there? >> How's that look? >> All right, we see you.
Um, Chuck Roland, Capen Islands Engineering, representing the owners of 203 Zel Street. Uh, so with your permission, I'm going to share my screen. >> Go ahead. >> Believe I have before you a fairly simple project and I'll uh as I talk
about it, I'll be zooming in on different parts of the plan. Um the proposed project includes the reconstruction maintenance of the existing stone and concrete bulkhead seaw wall with a vinyl uh sheeting seaw wall as well as the expansion of the bulkhead
along the southern extent of the property. Um and zoom in to show that. So this is the uh 72 foot um return along the southern extent of the
property. Uh the existing wall currently serves as a structural bank and provides critical erosion control and storm damage protection from the property. Uh the bulkhead is showing signs of deterioration and failure and to prevent
the structural failure of the wall. Uh to protect the property from the effects of storm damage, uh the wall needs to be replaced uh before it experiences total failure. All the proposed work will take place from the landward side of the seaw wall within the work limits. I've provided a
work limit down um Westminster uh uh road uh through our property using the existing curb cut. Um, and I've provided a work limit uh to
limit the expansion of construction um from expanding too far onto the property. And we'll be using this for uh staging and construction access for all the work. Uh the concrete and stone wall will be
removed in sections and uh methodically removed with an excavator. Carrie will be taken care of when removing the sections of the concrete as to minimize any disturbance uh to the resource areas. The vinyl wall and dead men uh will be placed in the same footprint as
the existing stone and concrete except for the southern expansion and will be driven into the ground with vibratory hammer. The existing bulkhead not only serves as a structural bank that provides erosion protection for the adjacent resources. Um, it is assumed
the bulkhead has not been replaced since it was constructed in the 1980s and the structure will be built mostly in the same location except for the southerntherly extent. Um, and the wall um is generally being replaced in the same height. Um, and as
I said before, all the work was going to be done uh from the landward side of the property. Um, at no point will construction activities or material storage occur in the seawward side of the wall. Um, and access would be
through the driveway. As I said, um, I'll just kind of run over the cross-section detail. Um, I actually in the narrative I have, um, a typo. It's not vinyl. It is composite, which is a
much stronger sheet. Uh so I've shown uh the sheets uh to be uh driven in or vibrated in um after the existing wall has been removed. Uh we're showing tiebacks that um come back 12 ft. We
think that this wall is going to be um a much better option than the existing stone and concrete. Generally stone and concrete uh nowadays really can't be constructed. um efficiently and I have
yet to find a contractor that's willing to install it and warranty the work. Um I can run over some of the concerns that uh the staff came up with. Um so um
aerial photos show the vessel storage on the uh coastal beach. Uh this can no longer be stored in the resource area. We're fine with that. Stack staff recommends the Ragosa Rose uh is reinstalled on site. Also, the restoration areas can be reconfigured in
zone A if preferred. Uh staff can review planting areas uh on an updated survey. Uh obviously, we're we're we'll be okay with um staff's recommendations for plants uh in those areas that I have marked on there.
Um I I think I stuck with uh beach plum and another saltwater tolerant one, but I'm h we're happy with whatever uh staff recommends. Um, as for the gravel driveway, um,
it's commented that there was a alteration in about 2017 and this can be approved and after the fact given the area is solely in the located AE flood zone. I'm assuming that means it's getting approved under this filing, but I guess uh, General Lissa can comment on
that. And then the big comment was is how is the uh removal of the existing wall going to impact the integrity of the wall portion to remain in the road layout. Um and I can actually go over that real quick. Um so I after this
comment and I think it's a very good question. Um my understanding is that it is a structural standalone wall. Um, and that's kind of a hard analysis to come up with um without doing
um like either ground penetrating radar to figure out what kind of wall it is and even then it's hard to say what the integrity of the concrete and stone is in that area. Um there is a return uh that we showed here on our survey uh and
I actually took a photo of it. It's hard to say um how uh that is tied in or uh the structural capacity of that return. So, one of the thoughts I had was is that um we would uh send a tieback in
around this area of the cedar. Um, we'd have to get a small machine in here to dig uh dig this area out and then we could um drill a 2-in hole through the uh concrete wall and then put a large
steel plate on the uh seawward side of the wall and tighten it all up with a turnbuckle. Um that'll ensure that this end of the wall will be stable. My suggestion would be to place it on the southerntherly side of this return so that way we don't have to disturb it.
Um, obviously this will add disturbance um of this native area, but we're happy to reveate it afterwards if that is um uh what you guys agree with would be the best solution. So with that, I'm happy
to take any questions. Thank you. Let me know if you want me to stop sharing or if you want me to leave it up for questions. >> You can stop sharing for now. >> Sure. >> Thank you. Uh Jen, >> so I think I missed that second return.
Chuck, are you going to have to remove all those cedars to do that? >> Uh yeah, defin definitely some of those cedars would have to come out. Um >> that's work that but that's that's in the road layout.
>> Yes ma'am. >> Um we could come up with a different solution to try to come up with um a tieback that's um all of it would be on in the road layout. Um, Alyssa had kind of mentioned that and that she I thought
you guys said you could be okay with it if it's in the road layout as long as it's in our half of the road because I do believe it is a private road. So, we do own the fee to the in the middle of the road. Uh, but we do not own the road. That's my understanding. Um, if
you'd like us to come up with a solution uh running closer to the uh that existing return, we can try to work on coming up with a a little less impactful um way of supporting that corner. If um
>> yeah, I I just don't want to see all those trees go. That's >> I think that's fair. Um, so we can we can uh what we could do is just we can drive a um a return probably a little bit further out. Um, it would probably have to be a
return that's almost 20 feet away. Um, and and because there's only a few feet uh between our wall and the existing return. So, uh it might get a little tight in there, but we could we could put a deadman back there. Um uh and uh
run, um the uh 3/4inch galvanized tieback, put a tie, uh turnbuckle on it and a steel plate on the water side still would work. It's just a little bit closer to the to the end there. So, I think it would disturb a lot less of the
the vegetation. Uh, some of the small stuff would have to get disturbed, but the trees would, I think, would be able to be remain. >> Okay, that would be great. Thank you, Chuck. >> Yep. >> Um, and yes, Chuck, uh, it does mean that we're going to approve the driveway
under this notice for you. >> Okay. >> Um, and that that was it. I was just I'm really just concerned with that wall falling into Eel Pond and then the um the
removal of all those of the cedars and the in the vegetation in that corner. So >> valid concerns >> any any rework would be appreciated. Thank you. >> Alyssa, did you have anything to add? >> Not at this time. Thank you.
>> All right. Commissioner comments. I'll start with Ron. >> Yeah, Jack. This is uh I've been familiar with the property and um it been there for years and years until they they changed the the current coming in from um the Vineyard Sound when they reduce the spit on Washurn Island and
they're supposed to in the next year or two, I think Jen can give you the exact thing. Um there's some engineering money out there and they designed to even cut it back even more. So, as soon as they cut that first down, um, Hurricane Aaron was through and the the waves came directly into the property as opposed to
hadn't been coming in for years. They just want to make sure that that's in consideration when you put up the strength and you put up the type of seaw wall replacement. >> Oh. Oh, yeah. Um to be honest, I feel an 800 series um vinyl wall will suffice.
And the contractor due to the um material there asked me to switch it to uh composite which is I mean I it's it's like I think it's almost half in half inch thick fiberglass essentially. It's it's
absolutely this unbelievably strong wave wave proof. It's I'm not telling you it'll last forever, but it'll be there long after me. >> Okay, I'm happy with that, Chuck. You're young. >> All right, that's all that's all uh all
set. Uh it's actually quarter inch fiberglass, but it's still it quarter inch fiberglass pretty thick stuff. No, sorry. I was on mute myself. Sorry, Steve.
>> Oh, thank you. Uh, yeah. Um, fascinating property. I was not familiar with it and I keep thinking I'm familiar with that neighborhood. Um, what is this is not technically conservation. What is the final appearance of the wall? Such a beautiful wall. And you're going to
dismantle it. And I can't believe it was put up in the 80s. It looks much even older than that. Yeah. Well, that's what happens when you have a um a very uh high energy area. Um so, uh it is going to be a corrugated composite wall. Uh we
do call for um a timber um a timber cap as well as a timber front wheel. That does kind of break up some of the appearance. Um and then uh additionally, there's a lot of stone in the front that come up about a
foot. So, in reality, it is a um um a corrugated wall, but it's not like a huge obnoxious corrugated wall. Uh so, in total, it's a five feet tall. Uh 8 inches of that is going to be covered by
a whale, and then um the top foot is going to be covered by the uh clamping whale. And then a bottom foot of it is going to be uh probably pretty much covered by the stones that are there. Thank you. I appreciate the detail. I I really do. Um when I pulled up to the
property, I actually was thinking I was at the guest house and thinking that's an awful lot of wall for this house. But anyway, >> thank you very much. >> Thank you, >> Dave. >> Um
Chuck, I I'm a little confused. Uh can you elaborate on what that really long return? What's what's the overall purpose of it? That's a really good question. Um, so off of the plan, and you can't see it, um, so there is Westminster and then there's an AB
butter and all of that is a beach. Um, and it has definitely sustained some, um, very heavy erosion throughout the years. And my client is looking for, um, a really long-term solution. Um, and as you can I don't know if you actually
walk down Westminster, but there's a lot of trees that have already started to fall into the road that's past um the existing and so that that's kind of experienced probably five maybe a little bit more feet of erosion. But on the southerntherly side um especially I
can't remember who commented uh about the opening up of that inlet is just experienced a lot of erosion. Um, and so, um, my client was very concerned and and I actually think I had designed a shorter return and and, um, she had
wanted a a a really long-term stable uh, wall. And so I felt that at this time as opposed to come back for a longer wall at any point if we if we go for a 70 foot return it's really going to be a
really long-term solution with very little impact to the resource as well as uh protect the property >> because I was just impressed with I I I saw the erosion down there on the butter properties. Doubt. I saw that it comes in quite a ways. Um because the beach
comes in, but it still seems like it's a long ways away from that. I guess it's I guess they're thinking really long term. Is it really a possibility that could really erode as far as that? I guess there must be if you're >> So I believe that the erosion is probably about 15 feet past Westminster
and Westminster is 30 feet. Um, and then the line of erosion pretty much lines up maybe about 15 feet on the inside, I believe, is what how I figured out. >> 15. That's interesting. I thought it was. >> So, um, so if you draw a straight line from kind of essentially where that
erosion, if it's a straight line uh running north, it pretty much uh comes uh generally in the middle of my um maybe like the, you know, threequarters of the way down that return. So, it's it's actually not as much of a crazy
return if you were to think about long-term erosion. >> Yeah, it it must be Yeah, it must be closer than I than I I was just there, but that than I saw. One last question. I kind of missed some of the conversation about the other return, but if you had that corner there of the of the replaced wall and then the return,
okay, the all the erosion is just just south of that and we have a lot of um uh trees that have already fallen in. Uh was was the conversation about the second return was that to try to try to shore that up? Is that is that was that conversation was about I I kind of missed it actually. >> Yeah. So um the staff's comments were
that uh they wanted they wanted confirmation that the portion of the wall that is in Westminster wouldn't just fall down because we remove our portion of the wall. So, and I can't really definitively say that one way or
another that um our wall isn't somehow supporting the rest of it. There is some erosion on that side, some instability. Um, and so it I think it's probably built in suspenders uh to put a uh a tieback and a dead man in there to shore
up our >> um to you know just to show that our wall is um if it is holding it up the dead will take over. >> I see. I I see. So the concern is taking out the existing wall could cause carnage. Carnage down there. That was a
concern, right? >> Yeah. >> All right. That's all I've got. Thank you very much. >> Thanks Dave. Dan. >> So, I got a couple of additional since you guys covered a lot of them. Um, let's see. So, this is maybe for the staff, but on the plan it says the plans
will be maintained for three years. I assume that just means they'll make certain that they they're supported for three years, but they end up at condition on the property, I assume. Is that right? >> Correct. >> Okay. And then the So, question for
>> Chuck. >> For Chuck. Um, you've got, you mentioned it a second ago, too. You've got some wood on the front of the wall and the top of the wall. Just want to verify. I I know it says it's pressure treated, but which kind of wood is it? >> Um, >> what's it treated with?
>> So, usually for dimensional lumber over 3 in, um, it is the marine uh, pressuret treated. I I uh usually leave that up to the contractor to spec the actual timber. Uh
if you want, I'm happy to put >> I just want to make certain it's not the old pressuret treated the old arsenic. >> Um ACQ. Um >> the wood itself is probably southern yellow pine. They use a lot of that. >> I got that. But it was how it's treated.
That's the question really. >> Yeah. Um, yeah, if you guys want to I I believe that tim uh timber over 3 in is usually allowed to use the ACQ. Uh, but um, >> if you could get that information for
us, Chuck, when you do your redesign, that would be great. >> Sure. >> Thank you. >> All right. Um, let me just keep going. So, there's that one. The only other one I had left is you've got
in the do in the description on page seven, you've got that your intent is to only use silk curtains if you need to. And I'm trying to understand, you know, how is that determined? Because this comes down to if all of a sudden there's a problem, it's kind of
already too late because now you've got all the everything flowing into the pond. If if you lose a sectional wall, >> um the the silk curtains are they they tend to be a little painful to maintain and
and we really don't think that they are um absolutely necessary. Um and I um I figured as uh as a good enough precaution that we would keep them on site um for a length of area that we're
using. So if we need it, it can get deployed quickly. Um so that that was generally my thought. Uh, we really don't think that um I I I'd almost rather
if you're if you're if you're asking about deploying the silk curtains for the entirety of the project, um I would I would rather have uh like an um let's see here, a pre-construction meeting with a with a contractor giving their um
methodology uh to ensure that uh turbidity uh stays to to a minimum and and it doesn't disturb the bay as opposed to us requiring um uh silk curtains. There's really only a couple of contractors in
town here that can really qualified to do this type of work. And from my experience working with them, they're they're very conscientious of uh creating turbidity and and I really don't think that this is going to be a project that creates a lot of turbidity,
but that's just my thought. Jen, >> you have a question or a comment on that? I I see. >> H >> Jen, did you have a comment? I saw you raise your hand. >> Oh, no. I'm going to follow up on Dan's comment in a second. I want Dan to finish though.
>> Okay. >> No, I'm all set. That was it. That's all I had. Thank you. >> Um me, >> you go. >> Go ahead, Ch. >> Okay. Um, so I missed a couple of
comments before. I was going to jump in afterwards. Uh, DMF is um, uh, basically saying that every effort should be made to protect winter flounder. So, uh, that time of year restriction is January through May. So,
we'll be putting a time of year restriction on there for you, Chuck. Um, as far as following up with Dan's question, another of the DMF's recommendations was mass DMF recommends the use of an appropriate containment of the use of appropriate containment
techniques to prevent siltation in the marine environment during construction. That screams silt, hurt, and boom to me. So, >> that's what this commission wants, then that's what we'll do. >> Yeah. And then any in any work in the
intertital zone should be limited to low tide set as work um such that work is conducted in the dry. So we'll probably the board will probably um we're going to recommend some of these conditions to the board. So you may end up seeing them
in there. >> Okay. >> Sounds good. >> All right. Thanks Chuck. >> Um Ronnie >> Chuck question for you. at the southern end. I I saw a bound in the ground right where the cedars are
eroded into the uh water and you got a stake to the left. Is that the property line? >> Um I do know that we staked the wall and the wall is uh yeah. So, actually on the plan I have a few I I believe there's
three different bounds that are along our property line. And I actually believe that on the uh there's there's a bound if you if you're actually walking down Westminster, I believe that there's one in the middle. Um I think that there was some bounds placed there just to
show that where we uh own the fee in the road. >> Okay. Yeah, cuz I see the bound and it looks like you st the walls about a foot to the left of it by down there. >> If you don't mind, I'm going to share my screen just so that way we can
think it's time to upgrade my computer. It's a little slow these days. Um, so here's the there's a bound here. There's a bound there. Uh, there's a bound right there. Um,
>> no, this one's right right on the water. It's right. >> And then I believe that we there's one in the middle here, which I believe that we uh either we installed or somebody installed to show the middle of the road. Um, and then I think there's actually one on the there might be one on the far side of the road.
>> No, I saw the one at the end of the road. So their property line is to the left of the bound is what you're telling me. So they just have an easement there. >> So this is actually a road, >> a physical road. Okay. >> Yeah. That's uh that's Westminster private road and um it's you know no
longer develop. It's not it wasn't developed after uh our driveway. >> Okay. >> Most of my other questions there is a question I had on the the north end. You have that finger that comes out that separates um where the swing set is. So, you're
not doing anything with that one. It looked like the end of it was deteriorating a little bit. >> So, I actually went there and I saw this wall. That wall looks like it's a lot more modern. Uh, and I don't think it's holding up a lot behind it. Um,
>> it said 1930 something on the end of the wall. >> Yeah, that's right. It did. >> Um, so you're talking about this wall or >> No, no, the finger that comes out. Yeah, right there. Um, we weren't really worried about that uh that wall. Uh, but
>> Okay. I was just curious >> while you're going through all this. I didn't know. Okay, >> I'm good. >> Thank you. Um, I don't have anything I've heard. Um, not from everybody else. Jen, um, any
comments? I know there was a email that wanted to be part of the record for this property earlier. >> Yes. So, I have several um I've received four emails since this project started and I think that's just because I put my
email address in the chat. So, um I do see someone's hand raised, but what I'm going to start with is I'll start with the chat that was put in. And the chat was from Alisa Gregory Bass. It's in
relation to what year the wall was built and it says it was first built in 1938. Second, um the gentleman that asked if they could send the email has their hand raised. So, um may I promote them to a
panelist so that they can ask their questions? >> Go ahead. >> Thank you. I promote to a panelist. Mr. Roth, I'm promoting you to a panelist. you'll need to come on. Um,
looks like his audio is trying to connect. >> Mr. Roth, are you there? >> Here he is. >> Yep, there you are. >> Okay, sir, you're on mute, so bottom left hand corner, sir. >> Okay, >> can we hear?
>> There we go, sir. >> Okay, sorry about that. I'm I just retired, so I have no use of technology anymore. Um, again, I I want to start out by saying thank you for the work you could do. I have some very short
comments. Um, I represent Lady Fair LLC at 44 Jewelers Avenue, which is the budding neighbor to the southern part of this property of the Carols, and we are co-owner of uh portions of
Westminster Street, which is a private road. So, I u just had some concerns. Um, overall, we're in support of the project. We understand fully uh the difficulties with erosion and uh because our property as well as four to the
south of us have suffered the erosion over the years. Um I I do want to have ask some questions for clarity about access to the work site where that specifically will happen on Westminster Street. um where the
uh designated area to temporarily store debris and especially the construction vehicles, there's going to be some heavy equipment. Um this should not be on Westminster Street. It should be on the property of the Carols. And uh after the project is done, if there's any going to
be any discussion about restorations and any damage that happens on Westminster Street from Central Avenue down to Eel Pond. Um, and then lastly, this is not in the email I sent you, Jennifer, but uh, it just came up about tiebacks going
onto Westminster Street. Um, that is what we all know going back to the 1800s as the Collinsson lot property. And so I don't think they were involved in uh, getting notice of this project. But if you're going to be talking about putting
tiebacks onto Westminster and under Westminster, perhaps they should be uh advised of that. And uh that's about it. So all we're concerned again positive on the project. I think we're all going to have to address this sooner or later. Um
and uh we're we're not against anything at all. We just want to make sure that the construction is done in a way that doesn't impact Westminster and it will be repaired to a flat surface at the end of the project. Anyway, that's all I have to say and thank you all.
>> Thanks, Roth. >> Thank you. We'll make sure, sir, that your email is part of the record. >> Um, Chuck, >> hello. >> Where'd you go, Chuck? There you go,
Chuck. We thought you ran away from us. >> I tried. >> Um uh I know you tried. >> Um can you confirm that all the construction material and and equipment will be stored on the subject property and not within Westminster?
>> Yes, ma'am. >> Thank you. Appreciate that. Um so, Mr. Chairman, I received a couple of additional emails, I think, just because people thought they could email me with their questions. So, if you don't mind, I will read them. I know we don't
usually do this, but um this one is from uh Lisa Bass. Um they are the daughter of a a butter. Um with regards to how will the work be done at the Waters End of Westminster if the new wall and
existing wall repair work is to be done from inside the property owner's own the property owner's property. So, I guess you're going to have to access Westminster, correct, Chuck? If you're going to rework the the um
>> return. >> Yeah, >> you're going to have to, right? >> Yeah. So, that as we discussed that return would be um that dead men would be in Westminster, but um to avoid some of these issues, uh I'll come up with a
revision to that. Okay. Um, the other question was, is the new 72 foot south wall the only section that will be bulkhead sheeting? Can that segment of work be required to be
completed by prior to June 21st? Um, probably not because of the time of year restriction you're going to have. So, it's either going to be work in the summertime or work in the fall. Do you know when they
want to complete this work, Chuck? >> No, ma'am. >> Okay. Um, there will be a time of year, well, there's going to be a recommended time of year restriction between January and May. So, that'll push the project off
into either the summer or the fall. Second question, when the new south when the new 72 south wall construction in is underway, can hours be reasonably limited to minimize the impacts of noise and vibrations to the neighbors at 38
Jewelers. have we can speak with the contractor about what working hours they have but we generally do not there's nothing in our regulations that prohibits work during certain hours but DMF would like the
work to be completed at low tide so it's going to be tide dependent and what efforts will be made to ensure preser preservation of existing vegetation at the water's edge of Westminster and I believe we're talking about that, Chuck. I want to see those
cedars saved or replaced. And is it possible to require the homeowner entity to repair and regrade Westminster after construction is complete, returning it to the same condition as it was prior to
construction and without any attempts to pass cost sharing on to the neighbors. This repair regrading should include the entire length from Central A to the cobblestone entrance to the southern end of the property owner's driveway. Um Chuck, is your client committed to
repairing any damage caused to Westminster for the construction of this wall? >> Uh we'll we'll make sure that we document the condition of the road. Uh and if we find that the construction has caused damage, uh I'm sure that we can talk about it. Oh,
>> okay. Uh, that's one. The other email um again from uh Alisa Bass. Carol does not have deed to half of Westminster based on Gregory Brainard and Collison record. She has an easement
to access her driveway. Um, and they were glad we're uh restore restoring vegetation at the end of Westminster. And the last one was, is there any reason to be concerned
that the intense vibration will destabilize that point? Um, I don't know exactly which point they mean. I'm assuming they mean at the end of Westminster.
Um, but you're going to look into that, aren't you, Chuck? When you look at your redesign, right? >> Yep. >> Okay, great. >> I think that is it for public comment, Mr. Chairman. Let me just take a quick look. That's all I have
>> for public comment. >> Um, so is there going to need to be a continuence to redesign or can we can this be closed and then conditioned afterwards for everything? Um, I'd probably like you guys to see the redesign. So, I think a continuence
would be necessary. >> All right. I Okay with that. >> Yeah, I'll fight you on that one. >> Uh, when's um I'm not going to have this ready for next week's
>> 4:15 would be the next hearing >> and you would need it a week before then. >> Yes, Chuck. It would be here for the ETH. Can you make that? >> Um, to be honest, it's kind of pushing it. I have a lot of work on my plate right
now. Uh, >> yeah, we have the first, the Well, you can't have the first. We have the 15th, the 2, and the 22nd for you. >> Oh, I like the 22nd. >> You like the 22nd? Okay. Um, hang on one second.
Uh yeah, Dave is going to be out so on the 22nd. So we still have a quorum. >> Okay. >> So I'll make a motion to continue to April 22nd. >> Dave has his hand raised. Dave, just one
more question. I've heard uh the redesign mentioned a couple times. I'm not sure what that is. when Chuck does his redesign, >> he's gonna look at that southern property return for us that part. Okay. >> Yeah,
>> I got you. Okay, that's all. Thank you. >> It's a good question because I wanted to make sure that that was it as well. I think that I'm going to switch to uh uh Ragosa Rose. Any other comments you can think of, Jen?
>> Nope. just the the the redesign of that and then make sure that the vegetation is either preserved at the end of Westminster or proposed to be replanted. >> Great. >> So I will entertain a motion to
continue. >> Make a motion to continue to 422. >> The address second. >> All right. I've got a motion and a second. questions. >> So Jen, >> yeah, I just have Jen. So you went through a list of things before that
were more than just the redesign to the end that were the changes to the plan. So there's a there's a a longer list of things that needs to be updated. Correct. >> The time of year restriction. >> Yeah, we'll condition the time of year restriction, the work at low tide, the
silk boom. That'll all be conditioned in the project. Um, we can condition the construction materials stay stored on the subject property and not within Westminster. Uh, that can all be conditioned. >> It's fine. Thank you.
>> All right, we'll call the roll. Uh, Ronnie >> and I, >> Steve, >> I, >> Dave, >> I, >> Ron, >> Disc I, >> Dan, >> all >> and Duffy I. Motion to continue to April
22nd is confirmed. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Thanks, Jeff. >> Have a good night. >> I will. >> All right. Next, we have continue request for a hearing a notion of intent. Anthony Jr. and Ela Aini, 42
Squib Drive, eastbound with mask for permission to reconstruct retaining wall steps, a deck, a patio, restore the coastal bank, and install restoration mitigation plantings. And that is being continued. Mike Jackson, Chapquitic Yacht Club,
Inc. 501c3, West Falmouth Harbor, West Fmouth, Mass for permission to install three seasonal floats in West Fmouth Harbor. That is being continued. And next we have Robert and Cara Martin trustees 58 Westwood Road LLC, 58 Westwood Road, Fmouth with Mass, for
permission to conduct invasive species removal and install restoration plantings. Jen Yes, Mr. Chairman. I'm trying to find who I'd like to promote on this one. Brian,
uh oh, I think I just promoted someone. Yep. Jake, I'm coming. Maria and Maria Hickey. So, Brian Wall, Jake Fricky, uh, Capen Islands, hi Jake. And Maria Hickey should be coming on
to present their project. >> All right. >> Okay. >> Well, thank you. Um, which one of you guys is starting out? Brian, you're muted. Sorry, I said that would be me, Mr. Chairman.
>> All right, go ahead. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, good evening, members of the commission. Uh, again tonight, my name is Brian Wall. I'm an attorney with an office in Sandwich, and I'm here tonight with Maria Hickey of Maria Hickey and Associates Custom Gardens and
Landscapes, and Jake Fick, uh, a PLS, a professional land surveyor of Cape Islands Engineering. Um, and we're here on behalf of the applicants, Robert and Cara Martin, who are the owners of the property at 58 Westwood Road in Felmouth. Um, we had an initial hearing
on this matter in December, uh, December 17th of 2025. So, I'm sure the commissioners uh probably recall, you know, the what the basics of this case, which is the property owners over some time engaged in clearing and install a
lawn uh behind their house without a permit. So, this notice of intent that's before you is proposing restoration uh including restoration plantings, mitigation plantings, and invasive species removal and management. We gave
a full presentation the last time, but since it's a few months back, I'll just very briefly refresh the commission's uh memory of some of the facts. The property here at issue is a 30,000 ft lot. Uh on the east is Westwood Road and
on the west is Buzzard's Bay. To the north of the property is a 40ft ride of way that provides access for the residents in the neighborhood to get to the beach. The property is developed with a single family dwelling. The dwelling was authorized by an order of conditions
that was issued in 1994. That order had a limit of work that was located a few feet off the rear of the house. And two conditions uh in that order are relevant uh to tonight's proceedings. Condition one and condition
five require that the area between the limit of work behind the house and the beach remain in its natural state. And since 1994, regulatory changes have now made that area um what's called a zone A no disturb buffer zone.
As I mentioned, over time, the Martins have been at the property since 1994. They're the ones that built the built the house. They cleared part of the area behind the house to give themselves a lawn primarily for family purposes and for their grandchildren. This came to
staff's attention rather recently and staff informed the Martins that this matter needs to be addressed. So in response to that, the Martins retained a team of experts to help them, including myself, Jake, and Maria. And we talked
with the Martins about what to do about this. And I mentioned this at the last hearing. You might recall the simplest way to address the violation would have simply have been to draw a grid across the lawn and plant shrubs in that lawn
and call it a day. But we believe that that would not be a quality solution because at this particular property there are extensive amounts of invasive species all around um in this vegetation. It's not only extensive but
intertwined. And Maria was of the opinion that if the lawn were simply restored over time, the invasives would take over and it would basically be um not a very qualitative solution. So we talked to the Martins about
thinking out of the box and trying to turn this kind of negative situation into a positive. And we propose to them that they consider a land management plan to remove all these invasives to replace it with native species to
restore the lawn area with natives and to restore the shoreway which is also highly taken over by invasives. The idea being we would provide a much more qualitative environment than what's there now. So we would turn essentially
a violation into qualitative land management plan. The Martins agreed. We filed a notice of intent proposing this. And after the filing, we met with staff on site extensively. If I recall correctly, it was a pouring rain day. We
were outside for about an hour. Um, we had a follow-up meeting with staff. We listened to their comments. We made plan changes and we presented those to you on December 17th, 19 uh 2025. Despite that site meeting and the staff
meeting, there were still many, many comments that were made at that particular hearing. And so, we requested a further continuence. Since then, we've made additional plan changes. We've met with the staff an additional time out on site, this time
in about a foot of snow, but we did it again. And we had another Zoom conference with staff. And at this point, I want to thank the staff and tell them how we appreciate all their input. But I know that they've all put a lot of time into this and I hope that they recognize that we have worked
collaboratively with the staff and I think that we've resolved many of the issues. Some were minor like making sure all the vegetation is away um from the house 10 ft. Some were more significant about trying to come up with how we were going to mitigate for the shed um that
was built without a permit. However, despite all of these efforts, um there still remains a difference of opinion regarding a significant matter, and that's the methodology. You're going to hear in a minute, Maria Hickeyi is going to speak, but I'm just
going to kind of identify the issue. Maria is of the firm opinion that because of the extensive amount of invasive species, the best way to implement this land management plan is to mechanically remove the existing plants. and in particular their
extensive root systems to get all of the invasives out of the area and then replant in a fresh uh clean soil. Notably, the machine that we would like to use for this has a boom that's longer than 20 ft. So, the machine will not be
going into this resource area. The machine will be driven down onto the lawn and it can use the boom to do all of the work without going into the dune or the beach. Interestingly, staff is not opposed to the mechanical removal of the vegetation on the northerly and subly boundaries
until it gets very close um to the dune and and the beach. But staff has made it clear that they're opposed to mechanical removal of the vegetation that runs in a north south uh direction, you know, parallel to the house and parallel to
the beach. So given the significance and and the importance of this difference of opinion, uh Maria has prepared a very extensive report that we submitted last week and that report goes through her opinion in minute detail as to why she
believes the mechanical removal will have an overall better result and why hand removal and treatment with herbicides should not be the methodology on the site because it will not have as good as a result. And since that's not my area of expertise, I would like to
turn it over to Maria at this point. And I'd like to ask Jake to share the uh plan if Mr. Chairman, you would agree to have the screen shared. >> Yep. >> Go ahead. >> Maria Maria would like to present. And Jake is here to answer any technical questions regarding, you know, the the
technical aspects of the plan. >> So, Maria, why don't you um why don't you start with that? >> You got it. For the record, Maria Hickeyi from Maria Hickey and Associates Landscapes. First of all, thank you so much to conservation staff for meeting
with us on site in extremes of weather. Um, torrential rains, frigid temperatures, so much snow, and all the Zoom meetings, emails, phone calls, in staff, um, in office meetings. We really appreciate
um all the input, the guidance, being able to discuss things. Um and then also to the board. I've been watching the hearings every week, even though I don't have hearings every week, just to learn more about you and your thought
processes and you guys have done a really great job, especially listening to some very technically complex cases and making some hard decisions. and thank you so much for your commitment um to this to the board and and making a
difference. I have been involved in invasive species management and land management plans for decades as far out as Santa Barbara, California, Little Compton, Rhode Island, and then
Cape Cod. This is what I do for my work every day, a lot of times seven days a week. Um and through hundreds of projects, one thing remains constant. When we are dealing with non-native invasive vegetation,
they have a dominant root system which will outco compete and strip your nutrients from the soil. They will girdle the roots of our natives and oftentimes they're altering the chemistry of the soil making it very
very difficult for our native species to not only survive but thrive. Um, I can say with 100% conviction, I have never done a project where when we peel back even one inch of the
top soil that it hasn't looked like a plate of pasta. That's how invasive and intense and infested these roots are of the non-native invasives. Currently, we're working on a project not even two miles down the coast and we
have been using a mechanical eradication and I even went into conservation office and brought a bin to show them like what we find right under the surface just to
demonstrate that even though we do plenty of manual extraction, when you have the density of non-native invasive vegetation that this site has. I would be
remiss if I didn't point out the fact that when we do these projects, we want to do them obviously with the least disruption to our resource area, but we want to have the most successful outcome. And we want to
not only remove our non-native invasive vegetation, but we want to remove the invasive root systems because these roots go anywhere from 15 feet to 100 ft. Um, I brought you a couple samples. I hope you can see this. This is what's
right under the surface. Okay. Um, if I hold this up, you can see it even better. This is the caliper of what we're talking about. Can you guys see this? These roots are like thicker than my thumb. Some of them are thicker than my
wrists. And when you do a manual extraction, what you're doing is you're taking pruners and you're cutting the root and then you're painting it with an herbicide. And the the risk to reward
when you have thousands of roots, some that the caliper are are bigger than my wrist, it's virtually impossible to eradicate the roots. So at least for the next three years over the life of
the permit you're chasing putting herbicide cutting and putting carcinogenic causing herbicides into a very fragile ecosystem in a dune and in an area that I don't feel comfortable
doing a manual extraction simply for the s for the sake of the root system and the infestation is so great, it's not going to ever solve the
problem. So, yes, we can do a manual extraction and cut and paint and it's extremely labor intensive because on a manual extraction, you can only pull so far on a route. When you're talking 60 and 70 foot roots
that are as wide as my wrist, I don't stand a chance. I'm pretty strong, but I'm not that strong and I'm very determined. Um, and again, it's like you're you're cutting and pulling to you can't get any more and then you're treating it with an herbicide. And
there's hundreds of millions of lawsuits out there right now if you watch the news on the carcinogenic properties of the herbicides that are used to kill these roots and these weeds. Um, yes, it's less disruptive
to the resource area in the sense that you don't have a machine in there. But in the greater picture, we don't have a machine in there. We have our machine on the back lawn.
The boom in the arm can extend out 25 ft. And the bucket, it's like a claw and it literally rakes, pulls all the roots with us. We rake back towards the lawn. We can get down there. And the power of a machine, as some of you know, if you
work in construction and other industries, is 10 times what the power of man is. Um, so I'm not recommending a mechanical extraction because we want to do it easier. We want to do it the most effective way and we want to cause the
least amount of damage to our resource area. Sitting on the lawn, yes, the machine reaches in, it rakes out all the roots. Staff agrees 100% we should do a mechanical eradication on the sides, you
know, the south um side of the land and the north side. And then they had drawn a line saying there's a so there's a clump of sassifrass. Um and we we refer to them as seedlings when the caliper of the tree is less
than 4 in. And these are less than 2 in. And they are so heavily girdled with vines. um on the pictures that I attached and submitted in my supplemental report. If Jake wants to bring up uh there's a picture that you'll see
the vines. Um I wait till he brings that up so you can see. So yes, so staff had said they wanted a mechanical eradication done of the area where the sumac seedlings are. Um and there's two little sections of sumac.
And if you keep scrolling, Jake, that should be in there. There we go. Okay. So, scroll down a little bit more. Um, so as you can see, those are all vine. Go back up because it showed the picture we want to show. Okay. So, if you see this picture here, you can see all the
vines that have girdled around the sumac seedling. It would probably take me a day to get all of them off. But what you don't see is what's below the surface. And from the hundreds of invasive
removals that we've done mechanically over decades of me doing this every day, minimum of five days a week, sometimes it's seven. I can assure you what is below the soil is horrifying. and we just want to get it all out of
there, put new soil in that has new nutrients, and replant the site. And yes, it's disruptive to the resource area, but it's a one-time disruption versus on a manual extraction and then
cut and spray. You're going in there on regular sc um scheduled interviews and intervals to cut and paint an herbicide that does impact the birds, the bees are
beneficial insects because you have to remember when you spray it, it doesn't dry >> right on the spot and you can have crosscontaminations if a bee lands on it or whatever. And we're talking not just like one little spot we're spraying.
It's thousands of areas, thousands of stems that we have to spray. And to me, that's so highly irresponsible to the environment. Like, it does far more damage than a one-time mechanical eradication. And so I know I've
I've frustrated staff because they want us to only do mechan manual in this area, but I have to stand by my expertise and what I went to school for and what I got certified for and the decades of doing these projects
of this is what works best under a manual manual cut and paint. We are going to continuously over three years be in this resource buffer treating these invasives.
Every time we go in there, when you have human traffic, you're disrupting nesting native birds, wildlife that may be trying to, you know, build nests, whether it's fox, coyote. Um, I've seen a lot of evidence of different wildlife out there on the
site. We want to go in, remove the invasive vegetation, remove the associated roots, renourish the soil, and replant. So, we're starting with a clean slate. The
best analogy I can give you is if you have a kitchen floor that's white and it's covered with 2 in of dirt and the homeowner tells you, "We want
you to clear just this one section of the floor and keep it clean for the next three years and not touch the other section." and the section you're not touching. The analogy is those are your roots that are
under the ground. And if you don't get them out, they're going to continue over and over and over again to contaminate where we did the mechanical eradication, put new soil, and planted it. And so I like to pride myself on do it
once, do it right. set your project up so that your plantings not only survive, but they thrive. And I understand staff's concern given the site conditions that our plants won't survive. And I offer you
this, that we can condition, as most of the orders of conditions say that all plants must be kept alive and in good condition. If they die, we have to replace them. There's been times that I've had to do
that in on sites that are very very harsh. I wouldn't rate this as a very very harsh site. Um I think the most important thing is that you want to match your plants to your site conditions. Yes, it's windy. Yes, it's
hot and dry. So you put the right plants in for those sight conditions, you're going to have success. Where you're not going to have success is if you keep a mesh of thousands of roots in your subsurface that are going to continue to
regenerate and send up vines and vegetation that's going to continue to wrap its stems and its and its um foliage around what's out there. Some of the
infestations that you have out there are the worst of the worst of your invasives. Um, and it will be years under a cut and paint of trying just to keep them at bay. And we don't want to do it halfass.
Excuse my expression. I want to do it the right way. And this is what I get paid to do over the last, you know, three decades. And I and it's not just on Cape Cod. I've been asked to go to other parts of our nation
because of my success. And although I can really respect that we can agree to disagree, I have to stand by I want to we want to recommend the methodology that is the most
effective with the least disruption to wildlife surrounding plants, you know, um and and even humans. I don't know if you guys had a chance to go out to the site and look because
we've had the worst weather this winter. And I did go out in subzero temperatures. I swear I thought I got frostbite. And I I did what I could to uh tie orange flagging tape on the
invasive vegetation. I didn't do a perfect job because due to how thick and dense the invasive vegetation was, I was limited to about two feet. And yes, for sure, there are a couple of times that
one vine wraps up and it runs 30 feet as you can see. Um, it's it was really intense. So, there's a couple of instances that I I tagged one vine twice, but you get the point. And that's only a twoft border. The
infestation goes all the way to the lot lines. And Jake, if you scroll down, I wanted them to see the root picture. Keep going. Um, keep going. It's uh it's at the end. See this right here? Okay.
This is what's 2 in below the surface. And these run upwards of 70 feet. This is a job site that's down the coast that we did a permit for. Similar, you know, almost identical invasive vegetation.
And the caliber of the smallest ones, it's about the size of your thumb, just to give you a scale. the bigger ones next to the holly leaf. See the big ones on on the left? That's
like my forearm. So, for starters, it's physically impossible to cut through that root to paint it because these invasives have been in there for years and years unchecked. So, when I first was, you
know, called in as a team me member and I went out there, I said exactly what Brian said. Of course, you know what? We can just present a plan that we're going to reveate the back lawn and plant it and do our little grid of plants, but we're not being responsible in doing so
because we're not looking at the bigger picture, which is this is a site like most of the coastline that has not had a land management plan in place, that has invasives that have grown out of control, that have just absolutely
struggled and killed and what and and made it inhospitable for our native shrubs and they offer very little habitat value
to the wildlife. So when we're done, one of the biggest things that I hang my hat on is my ability to h to provide a very high functioning wildlife habitat full of flowering and burying shrubs that
provide not only food but shelter. And it's a win-win for everyone. It helps restore our bee populations. It brings in beneficial insects. It gives the native song birds a place to to nest. And all of this is with very little disruption from mankind when we do a
mechanical eradication. It's >> almost a oneandone. We we remove all the roots, >> we nourish the so soil, and we replant. It's very very minimal that I have to go
in there and manually extract. Yes, you might have a random vine, but because we're constantly monitoring, I spot it right away. And that's when I would do a man a manual cut and spray. But for the most part, the
overall point that I'm trying to make to everyone is this site is so heavily infested with non-native in vegetation and vines that have a complex very large root system under the surface that if we
don't eradicate it using a machine which limits we're not in the dune, we're not on the beach, we're on the lawn, we're just reaching ing in, but it's a a 99% effective way of getting out your roots.
>> Thank you, Maria. >> Okay, >> I appreciate it. We I well aware now. I know your opinion is on this. Um, just to speed this up, it's past my bedtime. >> Much appreciated. So,
>> um, Jake, you can stop sharing. >> Thank you. And I did actually have a a chance to go out and visit the site, so Oh, good. Um I'll allow uh Jen. >> Uh yes, Mr. Chairman. Um
did work extensively with the applicant and the pro or the applicant's project team. Um I think we've got the plan to uh I mean where we we we can as staff we're still our position still remains the
same. and we are really uncomfortable with um removing everything. We think it can be done. It it will be a little bit more labor intensive, but we do feel that it can be done. We've seen heavily invaded sites before. We've seen other
companies be able to do it quite effectively. Um and we're just concerned with the disruption to all the native plants that are out there. So, our position remains the same. Um there are some areas on site we absolutely think
um mechanical removal is appropriate and other areas of the site we just don't feel um it's it's appropriate or necessary. That's all. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Alyssa, did you have anything to follow up with?
>> No comments. Thank you. >> Thank you. All right. I will give uh the floor to the commissioners. So Dave Uh so Jen um I think one of the key things you said there in your little summary was um that the mechanical
approach removes everything. I think that's you said that right? So mechanical to remove everything. >> Mechanical would be to remove absolutely everything. There are certain areas on that site that we can support this type of activity and there are areas that we
cannot support that type of activity. And the reason you can't in the certain areas I know on the dune we're talking about of course is that uh natives are also removed. >> Correct. >> Correct. So that so it sounds like almost we have on one side we would like to take out as many roots as we can of
the invasives but we hate to take out natives. Is it is that what it comes kind of comes down to? One side the balance of one side of the other is one side says remove everything. It's going to be beneficial. The other side says, "Yeah, but we're gonna we're going to lose natives." Is that Is that Is that
Does that kind of Does that kind of summarize the >> That kind of summarizes it. >> And then I just think that Yeah. >> With all due respect, we're replanting the whole site with natives and adding trees in. >> We know. >> So, we're not losing, you know, we're
not losing anything, per se. Yes, we're removing natives, but we're we're starting with a clean slate and putting in plants and trees that are healthy that don't have their roots contaminated. >> Thanks, Ron. >> Yeah, I was out there looking at the
site. It's definitely heavily invasive. I I think there's um there's some reason here that we can go as as close as we can to the the dune or the coastal bank, whatever it is, and um and use that mechanical removal. Um, but again, I'm
I'm with Dave here and and Jen that there's there's so many native plants there. If you go into the dune and use that mechanical um means of removal, it's just going to rip out all the plants. And I guess we both we both said that twice uh already. Um but again, I
think it's a then if you want to even go further, you can, you know, if if one of the agents is available, you could go in as far as you can with the mechanical and see what happens. I know there's a couple of them right near the right at the top of the dune right between some of the natives that look like it would
be um you could easily pull them out with the mechanical. You wouldn't have to do the um the cut and and swipe but others that you're just going to remove all all the trees and everything else up there. So that's what I have to say. Thanks. Bye. All set.
>> Dave, I'll get back to you at the end. Dan. Um >> so am I on a quorum for this one? Okay, I think you're muted, but I think you said no. >> No. >> Is anybody else not on the quorum? Melissa,
>> the quorum is Dave, Ron, Ronnie, Steve, and Bill. >> All right. All right. >> But I do have questions for you, though, that might help. Can somebody put the
picture back up of the of the property? the plan. >> Got it. >> Yeah, the plot plan there. So, in the back, can you explain the colors and what the difference is? I got the lawn. Is the red the area that you want to do
all the removal on in the back? >> Okay. So, um, see the blue line? >> That's a yes or no question. Just is the red the area you want to do removal on? >> No. >> No. >> Okay. Where is it then? >> The area. So the machine sits on the
back lawn. If you see where the war see the green band closest to the to the house. >> Yeah. >> That's where the machine sits. The machine only reaches in as far as the blue line is. See that blue hash line? >> Yeah. Okay.
>> That's it. >> Got it. >> And actually actually Jake outlined it where it says >> and and how much depth are you guys trying to remove of the soil out of that? So, I'm going to go down as far as we find roots. The site we were on today,
we went down two feet. Sometimes we only have to go a foot down, >> but no matter what we go down and take out, we replace. So, the grade and the elevation does not change. And whatever gets taken out gets replanted. So, I don't want anyone to feel like we're
stripping a site and not then not putting natives back in. We're putting in trees. We're putting in shrubs, you know? I think we got that part. Okay. I was just trying to figure out how much damage was going to be done back there. >> I got it. >> Mr. Chairman,
>> technically not in the dune. >> Mr. Chairman, may I may I interject briefly here? I I think that was an excellent question. Um, when I gave the presentation and when Maria gave hers, we kind of picked up where we left off the last time, but there have been significant changes to the plan and Jake
has got it up there now going from the ocean side, the west, sorry. Yeah, the west side moving east. One of the things we did was we pulled the limit of work back extensively compared to the last plan. Secondly, if you can see that box,
it says manual extraction of non-natives. What Maria was saying, and Jake, maybe you can just either show or take over. The mechanical removal is not of the entire area. It's just in the designated area. And maybe Jake, why don't you take
over and and show that area? So, so this this area here that I'm outlining and this which is a has a green hatching on it uh is identified as a manual extraction area. And so all of these
trees within this area are all going to remain. Um this this is going to be worked with the the cut and paint technique. um because we we recognize that this is very heavily vegetated with natives and uh and and a manual
extraction would be would be too devastating for for this portion of the site. Um the uh let me clear all that off of there. uh outside of that area.
Everything else that has a a a colorized hatch to it will be treated with the manual with the mechanical extraction. And the different colors to answer the question about that are related to what
the species of plant is that will be uh will be replanted in that area. And there's a there's a key code off to the side that identifies all the different species along with these little green bubbles that identify the species within this area. But um but there is you know
even though we've uh we've discussed this ma manual versus mechanical there is some area which is going to still remain as manual extraction which is a portion of which is the area that staff was very concerned about. Um, and we are
still proposing to do mechanical on the rest of the area, but this is this is me manual in this area here. >> Can you just outline the rest of the area for the mechanical in the back? I get this I get the north and south side, but on that >> Okay. So So it's it's it's everything
that that isn't. >> So it's north of that line >> right there. So, it's it's this all through here all the way to the road and then along this side of the property line here inside of this uh scoloped
edge right here. This is all a lawn that so there there will be a mechanical removal of the lawn and there's uh in this area is uh some uh ornamental planting all along. There's a scalloped edge that runs along here and that's an
existing disturbed ornamental planting area. Um, and so really the the area of natives um is just from that scalloped edge out to our limit of work. Um, that is sort of the the area of contention,
>> right? That's the only area of disagreement right now. >> Got it. Okay. >> So, Jen, I I I haven't been to the property. up cuz I didn't think I was on a quorum. But I'm just trying to figure out. So when you were referring to all of the natives that you're worried about, were they both in both the sort
of northern section and southern section of the the back back area? >> The section we're concerned with um Dan runs from that sand path. >> Okay. >> South to the property line.
>> All right. So everything in the back. Got it. All right. Okay. Thank you. I'm not sure that that was an accurate statement. I I might have misunderstood you, Jen, but I think the area of disagreement is from the s the sand path
south about halfway to the property. >> Sorry, Brian. You're right. Because you're doing manual. So, right, >> sand path, a little above the sand path because there's sumac in there. And then from the sand path down to the hatch mark. >> Exactly. >> That's still where we're concerned. >> That's the only area we're going to do
manual south of that area. It's it's just that particular area we are making the case that mechanical would be the best way to do it there because of the nature of what's there and staff is of of a different opinion which which we respect but we respectfully disagree.
>> Understood. All right. Thank you. >> Thank you Jake. You can stop sharing. >> All right. Um, who didn't I get to? Steve, >> thank you.
Um, uh, thank you for the presentations one and all. And, um, I believe we've been compromising on the area to be mechanically uh, harvested, so to speak. Is that
correct? >> What do you mean by compromising? We started at one point and we're at a point where not as much is going to be mechanically harvested. >> Right, >> Jen? >> Correct. >> Thank you. Okay,
it it sounds like a reasonable approach. I got to say uh thanks Dan although not on the quorum. that helped me understand a little bit more about the the delineation of the area to be mechanically u dealt with.
So thank you >> Ronnie. >> Thank you all for and thank you Maria for that presentation. I think it was similar what you did earlier. Um, something definitely has to be done with them invasives. And
if you had to do manual for 3 years, are you going to guarantee that that is not going to come back right away? >> I can't. It's going to come back. That was my whole point. >> And I want to do it once and do it right. >> Okay, that's the only question I have. Thank
you. >> All right, Dave, you have your hand up. >> Yeah. So, um, yeah, thanks Dan also helping us identify the northern and southern areas. That's really helpful. So, in the northern area, uh, there I'll just put this question out. Anyone can answer it. There are some natives in
that northern area. >> There's two natives. >> There are two standumac, >> right? There's two sumac. They're less than two inches in um, caliper, which we consider like a seedling. And the point
I was trying to say in my supplement is we want to take them out to do the mechanical removal and then we're going to plant new ones. >> Well, that's what I was going to ask. Um, >> right. We're not losing >> forever the sumac. >> I just want to uh disinfect basically
and get all the the roots out >> because if I don't get the roots out, it's like rowing against the current without a paddle. So, I guess I wanted to ask staff, uh, are we, uh, if they take out a few a few natives up there, but then they replace, uh, that's not,
um, that's not good enough. >> Why is that not adequate? >> What was that, Dave? Was that to me? >> If if if we Well, staff, if if we remove if we remove some natives, a few uh, in that northern area, and then we then we
replant them, uh, why is that not adequate? It's going to be up to the board. And they're not. Maria, you're not replacing them with sumac. >> No, I said I would in my supplemental that I would replace them with sumac. >> It's not on the plan.
>> It it it says on the phase of the plan edge of sumac to be replanted. >> To be replanted. Okay. >> So, I guess my general question is, >> are you replanting the ones you're removing or are you replanting? So, you're going to take them out and replant them? Well, I'm gonna put new
ones in because the the ones that I take out probably >> Yes. Yes, we know, Maria. I'm aware. >> Um Dave, to answer your question, I mean, that's going to be up to the board. I think there just some natives in there that we'd like to keep. Going in there with a machine and digging two
feet down into the soil is incredibly damaging. Again, we we have seen several other companies be able to do this type of work uh with a little bit more um with with like using drip invasives.
It's not uncommon in Falmouth. We see it all the time. >> I'm only asking >> we're just concerned with the with the methodology. That's all >> I I'm only asking. >> No, I understand. >> If we take out an evasive, then we replace it. seems reasonable to me.
>> Okay. >> No, I mean I'm asking for professional opinion on that. I can't answer that. >> I have given you my opinion, Dave. I mean, >> why we think it can be done um without
>> what why can't we plant >> for lack of a better word like Maria said scraping everything out of a resource area buffer. we think can be done in a less damaging way.
That's all >> I Well, I just don't know why replanting isn't isn't um >> isn't good a good a good approach. That's what I'm asking. Why can't replanting be a good approach? >> Okay. >> No, I'm not getting an answer.
>> I'll answer. >> Well, David, I don't know what you're asking from me. I mean, >> we've seen too many of these fail. There's an entire stand of trees they're proposing to take out that have been repeatedly topped over the years, and it's now conveniently not proposed as a Vista Corridor, but will inherently
become one when all of these trees are removed. I've gone to compliances for six years now, and it's so sad to see all these trees proposed and them completely fail in these harsh. You can see how >> you can see how windpred the trees are over here. And no, it's not as
aggressive as many other sites that Maria and I have worked on together in terms of, you know, that wind and wave activity, but it is particularly harsh. I don't have any faith that those new trees are going to >> I I'm still and all those trees are
going to be proposed on the sidelines and not back into its original position. >> It's one thing to remove a native when it's completely compromised like there's a couple of them on the sidelines. We completely understand that. There's no reason we can't pick and choose and save these natives when we can. To go in
there and completely remove everything is overkill in the staff's opinion. I've seen too many of these. >> They won't be back. >> Okay. That's what I wanted. >> So, >> and and that's what I wanted to hear. >> Yeah. And and the herbicide treatment
will take longer than three years. They will need to either get an extension or file an RDA for follow-up work. We see this all the time, but it does prove successful and those natives can stay and they can regrow um and become a healthy dune environment. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. All right, Maria, I'll give you one last >> I wanted to make uh a couple of points. First and foremost, the chemicals that you have to spray to kill the roots are proven carcinogenic.
I've had an applicator's license since 2013. I didn't renew it. You know why? Twice I've had cancer twice and the oncologists are like, "Get away from the chemicals."
That's just human impact. Never mind. You do have when you're spraying the thousands of gallons that we're going to have to spray if we don't mechanically remove those roots. It le it gets into the soil.
It impacts everything. It doesn't stay contained in the root. It impacts your birds, your butterflies, your beneficial insects. To me, that's far more detrimental to a one-time
raking out roots that we need to get out so that we can renourish, put new soil in that has all the organic nutrients it needs for our trees and shrubs to thrive. And you guys, in the orders of
conditions, there is a condition that we have to keep the plants and trees alive. And I have handpicked trees that will thrive in this environment. I have other
projects that my tree recommendations were overturned by someone on the board wanted this. They insisted on this. We had to put that in. It was in the order. And guess what? Those trees survived. They did not survive. They've died. This is what I do
every single day for over 20 years. >> All right. With all due respect, I'm just trying to say >> Yep. No, I understand. Um, I get it. Thank you. >> Okay. >> All right. Um,
what is the commission's flavor on this? >> A motion to close the hearing and take under advisement. Driscoll >> Bowman. Second. >> Got a motion and a second to close the hearing and take it under advisement.
questions from commissioners, Jen, Lissa. All right, call the roll. Steve, uh, I'm going to vote to take it under advisement, but I acknowledge that I
will be discussing this during our, uh, next meeting, which I can't attend. So, um, >> Steve, did you just say you're not going to be here on the April 1st? >> Yes, I did. >> Okay, thank you.
>> Steve, >> I >> Ron >> Briscoll I, >> Ronnie, >> I >> and Duffy I. Motion to close the hearing, take it under advisement has passed. >> Thank you guys. Thank you for all your work on this.
>> Thank you everyone for listening. I know it was a lengthy hearing. Thank you very much. >> You're welcome. >> Have a good evening. >> Thank you everyone. >> All right. >> Next we have a request to amend an existing order of conditions.
Mike Lava, Purpose Proprietary Properties LLC, Oneb Betsway, East Falmouth, Mass Request to amend the order of conditions from Mass D25-4958 to install a pool with patio, a pool house, and a fireplace with patio. Jen.
>> Yes, Mr. Chairman, I have promoted James Garfield from Morris Engineering to present his project. Good evening, Mr. Garfield. >> Yes, good evening, everyone. Uh again for the record, James Garfield, registered engineer with Morris Engineering here tonight representing
the applicant. Um I'm not sure if anyone can either share the screen or or I can share. >> You can share if you can. >> Okay. >> Okay. Can everyone see that? >> Yes, >> now we can. >> Okay, great. Um, so we're here tonight
for a request to amend an order of conditions for a new single family home project um, at One Bets Way. The order of conditions were issued back in June 5th of 2024. The subject resource area for this project is buffer zones to a
coastal bank. Um the new dwelling is currently actually under construction, but the owners are requesting to add some additional work toward towards the rear of the property. Um the owner has added a swimming pool, hot
tub, poolhouse, and some patio areas in the rear yard. You'll note that most of these areas actually sit outside of the 100 foot zone B buffer to the coastal bank. Um but there is a small portion of the project that is within the 100 foot buffer. Um, we are not proposing any
work within the 50-foot zone A buffer. We're not proposing um a new limit of work line. The limit of work will match that um with the previous approved plan. Um we believe these changes to be minor in nature and
we did receive one comment from staff that the um patio and fireplace we have proposed in the rear yard. We're showing it at 58.7 ft from the coastal bank um and staff has noted that this will have to at least be bumped up to 60 ft. um I
believe that's a local regulation to be um at least 60 ft for a structure uh away from a coastal bank. So, we're amendable to that. We can certainly add that as condition of approval if um the commission wishes it. So, um but with that, I'll turn it back to you for
questions. >> Thank you, Mr. Garfield. >> Uh Jen. >> Nope. That was our only our only concern, Mr. Chairman. So, I'm all set. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Fairfield. >> Alyssa, anything to add? >> Not at this.
>> Perfect. Any questions from any of the commissioners? I'll start with you, Steve. >> No, thank you, >> Dave. >> I'm all set. >> Ron, >> I'm all set. That's good luck. Done for me.
>> And I don't see Ronnie, so um Ronnie, >> sorry, no questions. I had to use the restroom. Perfect. Well, I will uh entertain a motion to amend an existing order of conditions.
>> Make a motion to amend the existing order of conditions as discussed. Driscoll >> Bman second. >> Got a motion, a second questions? Seeing none, we'll call the role. Ron >> Driscoll. I >> Dave.
>> Dan >> Ronnie. I >> Steve I >> Duffy I motion to amend an order of conditions as discussed has been accepted. Thank you Mr. Garfield. >> Great. Thank you everyone. Have a good night.
>> You too. >> All right. And we have a continued request for a certificate of compliance. Edmund Dapion 29 Noset A East Felmouth Mass. Request for a certificate of compliance for mass DP25-4627.
Jen. >> Yes. I'm going to promote the property owner. >> Jen, I'm just going to I'm not on this quorum. And the next one is continued. So, I think I can depart. Is that correct?
>> If it's if it the chairman allows you to leave the meeting, Ronnie, I think you're good to go. >> I'll allow it this one. Ron, >> thank you. Good night, Ronnie. >> Good night. >> All right. Good evening, Mr. Dapion.
>> Uh good good evening uh to members of the commission and also the staff. Uh again, I'd like to extend my appreciation to staff as I'm be listening to all the great work that you do and I I appreciate what you do especially when I understand that all of
you are volunteers. So, thank you sticking for such a long hours uh into this So, just to recap this one, Mr. Chairman, um I'll let Alyssa recap it for you >> and then we can continue with the
hearing. >> Perfect. Alyssa. >> Yep. So, this was continued so that the commission could visit the site. Um there were a couple non-compliance issues that um seem to have been worked out in this process. I do believe the
last issue is whether the commission will require the tree replacement. Um that's pretty much it. >> All right. Um questions from commissioners Dan.
>> So Alyssa, I thought that the pri agreement was to move it away from the septic and move it to the side. Is that right? Or use a different tree and what have you. Just move it someplace else. >> Yes. So, in communication through the COC process, um I identified that the
replacement tree that had been removed by a previous owner during the septic installation um was not on site. In working with Mr. Durstanian about the tree replacement, um we had agreed that an understory tree would satisfy the
requirement. There was concern with the location. Um some proposed locations were simply um outside the property. the the road layout's kind of strange. So, it kind of appears to be part of the property, but it's it's or or was outside the buffer.
Um, I had worked with him to um propose native species. There was some talk about non-native species, but that's just not something that the staff can approve. Um, ultimately I believe that
the concept was there was no room for a tree to be installed in that sideyard or in the front yard in accordance with being inside the buffer zone and within the property lines. Um, staff finds that a tree could be installed elsewhere um like in the backyard.
>> So So the proposal then is just to essentially move it to rather than from the front or the side, put it in the back. >> Yes. Uh my fear is that a determination will be to not have a tree installed simply because there is no room but there is room. Um
so you know a waiver to this particular application is one thing but to make clear that should future tree removal come down and restoration be required by staff that there is adequate room on the property for that. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you.
>> Yeah. May may I um say something actually? >> Sure. >> Uh so I was actually um again thank you M Berg Journal for sending me the uh the documentation that was for February 27,
2019. uh in that documentation which was for the upgrade of the title for for the septic uh to title five within that uh it says that one of the um items that was uh bulleted here is uh removal of a
14in oak uh that was actually in the back right and the reason that they knew this this tree is will be in the um area that the septic has to be constructed or
late uh what I'm sure at the time if they if the committee and also again if the if it was realized that the tree that was removed that was not listed here if it was uh
I'm wondering how the committee would have voted uh for that um knowing that that tree would also had to be removed just like this other tree that was listed here Just a just as a side note as I as I was
looking at the documentation and I'm the reason that I've been asked to plant the tree is because this was an oversight at the time uh not knowing that the tree had removed due to the septic installation. >> Thank you Dave.
>> Uh no questions >> Ron. So, we're just going to put a tree in our backyard, right? >> And to clarify, >> and we put it in the backyard. So, if I'm all set with that, if that's if
that's where we're going. Thank you. >> The quorum is Bill, Ron, Dan, and Steve. >> Okay, Steve. >> No questions. I'm sure we can uh issue an order of conditions that will uh
>> Steve, this is a certificate of compliance request. >> Did the the applicant is requesting compliance and the staff is saying there's an outstanding tree >> um requirement. >> Then I agree with Ron. I changed my
mind. I agree with Ron. >> I I don't even know what's going on. Basically um if so basically until the tree is planted, >> we can't grant a certificate of compliance. Is that's what's going on here?
>> I think so. >> Yep. All right. >> Yes. So the the vote would be to grant a certificate of compliance and the vote would be no until the tree is planted or can we suggest a continuence until the tree is
planted and then come back for the compliance. >> The staff can grant the compliance once a tree is planted if that's the commission's wish. >> Yeah. So so how was So this would be a no vote then.
>> Correct. or to continue it. >> So, you have two options. You can close this hearing. >> It was a request for a certificate of compliance. >> You can put a positive motion on the floor and then if you do not want to grant compliance until a tree is
planted, you vote no. We will work with the applicant on tree placement. And once that tree is planted, we will grant compliance. Or if the board feels more comfortable, you can continue the matter until the tree is planted and then you can grant compliance uh close the
hearing and grant compliance yourself. Either way, >> all right. Um I'll go whatever what is easier for you, Mr. Sapion. It looks like there's a tree that's going to be planted. Uh uh so one of the requests that I had
again uh u what type of trees because I understand that if these are native or could we have a semi-native um tree uh and could it be planted on the side of the house in the rear
>> if that's what the requirement is >> we can work with you on the the the the tree placement it has to be on your property start it can't be in the road layout it's going to go in back. We can work with you on the location. It does need to be native, but we can work with
you on a smaller understory trait. As Alyssa had first suggested, there are a number of smaller understory trees that would do well on that property. Offer some color back there. They flower. They're very pretty. >> Okay.
>> I've listed those previously. >> Okay. Um, I think it might be easier just to uh make I'll accept a motion to close the hearing. >> Okay. I'll make a motion to close the hearing and and grant a certificate of
compliance. Driscoll >> a second. >> Second. >> I'm sorry, Ron. When the tree is planted. So, this is basically if we're going to close a hearing to order to issue a
certificate of compliance, if a vote if you decide that um we can't grant it, you'll say no. And then when that vote is done, the staff will work with Mr. Dapen to follow through with it and then
follow up with us. So, we're going to have a it would be a positive vote with a a nay sort of a positive motion with a nay vote if you don't want to grant the compliance. >> I'll second the motion.
>> All right. Motion in a second. Any questions? All right. So, who's on the quorum again? Melissa? >> Quorum is Bill, Ron, Dan, Steve. >> All right, Dan. Uh nay. All is nay.
>> Ron >> disco. Nay. >> Steve. >> Patton. No. >> And Duffy. No. Motion to grant a certification of compliance is denied. Um staff will work with you, Mr. Sapion,
about the location, planting, stuff like that. So, >> thank you very much. >> Thank you, Mr. S. >> Good night. Thank you. >> Good night. >> And lastly, Timothy Liam, trustees RNG Reality Trust 129 East Falmouth Highway,
East Falmouth, Mass. Request for a partial certificate of compliance for mass DP25-4524 has been continued. That looks like it's it. So, I will entertain the final motion. >> Make a motion to adjurnn. Driscoll.
>> I'll second that. We have a motion to second. Roll. Dan Walsh, >> Steve, >> Dave, >> hi. >> Ron, >> I >> Duffy. I motion to adjourn is
successful. Thank you guys all for another wonderfully long night.