Heat. Heat. All right. Good evening and welcome to the November 12th uh meeting of the Federal Conservation Commission. This meeting is being held virtually via Zoom video conference and is also being broadcast by FCTV on ch and 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. Uh, I'd like to remind the commissioners that for commenting, I will call on each
one of you in turn. So, please refrain from speaking over each other. Also, all votes are done by by a roll call. So, when I call your name, please state your name and your vote for the record, even if you've made the motion or a second.
Uh to our public attendees, at this time during this meeting, at any time during this meeting, you may enter a comment or question via the chat function. At the appropriate uh time, they will be read into the record.
Uh 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'll be promoted into the hearing as a participant. When you are selected, you must have your video enabled, be succinct, and
respectful of others. Uh public comments will be limited to three minutes. RDAS under a request for determination of applicability. The application is asking the commission to determine if the provisions of the Mass Wetlands
Protection Act and or the Fmouth Wetlands bylaw apply to their proposed project. A negative determination is that the provisions of the act and or bylaw 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 uh would require a notice of intent application. So, as an applicant, what
you want to hear is a negative determination. Um for the benefit of anyone waiting for particular hearing tonight and so that you're not uh waiting unnecessarily, the following hearings are expected to be
continued. Um Pier 37 on 110 Scranton Avenue. Um 15 Dair Lane uh and zero Rand Beach Road North. Um
let me see what else do we have. I think that was it. Oh, and the enforcement order on 41 Mary Emanuel Way and East Falmouth is being continued uh as is 32 Squiba Drive, East Fmouth,
Mass. Okay. So, the first uh item on our agenda this evening is executive session. So, Mr. Chair, I'll make a motion to go into executive session.
>> Disco second. >> Okay. So, we have a motion, a second to go into executive session. We we should be back shortly. Um and hopefully it won't take too long. So, I have a motion and a second to um go into executive session. I want to call the role.
Courtney >> I. >> Steve. >> Pat. I >> Ron >> Escali >> Ronnie >> Bman I >> Dave >> I
>> Bill >> Duffy I >> Jim >> McGrath I >> and Robins is an I. >> Okay we're in executive session. Okay. So, we're back in executive
session. We're recording, >> right, Jen? >> Yep. You're back in regular session and we're recording. >> Session and we're recording. Okay. >> Yep. >> Other business. Amend vote taken on zero West Balmouth Highway. And this is a a
um little legal ease we have to add, Jen. Is that what it is? >> Correct. So last week um in uh response to the petitioner's article um proposing to be amended on town meeting floor,
um we took a vote to basically remain neutral um in the discussion and we voted to defer to the will of town meeting. The correct vote um guys and my apologies would have been to defer to
the will of the property owner which is the select board. So that is the vote we have to amend. We just need to amend our vote to defer to the will of the select board. >> Third move second. We got a motion by Courtney and
a second by Ron Driscoll um to amend as presented by Jen. So >> yeah to amend to defer to the will of the select board. >> Will select. Okay. >> Correct. >> Any other comments or questions? All
right. Hearing none, I'll call the role. Courtney >> Bird I. >> Steve >> Matt and I. >> Roniscal. >> Ronnie. Did we lose? >> Woman, no. >> Oh, Roman, no. Okay. Uh Dave
>> Kent, I >> Bill >> Duffy I. >> Jim >> McGrath I >> and Robins is an I. So by counter vote of
what is that? seven and one uh one against. The motion carries to amend uh the recommendation. Um >> yep. And I will write that up as you asked me to last week, Mr. Chairman.
Send that out to you and that will be the statement if um if asked on town meeting floor or at any of the precinct meetings that the community development director will will address. >> Okay. Thank you, Jen. >> Okay. Yep. Sounds good. All right. Next
up is a request for um a continuence under a notice of intent. Brian Mclofflin, Felmouth Pier 37, Inc. 110 Scrant Nav, Felmouth, Mass for permission to replace and relocate the
bulkhead, remove a portion of filled tide lands, and expand the existing dock system. Jen, >> uh yes, Mr. Mr. Chairman, the uh applicant is requesting a continuence
until December 17th. >> Okay, we have continuence to December 17th. We got a motion by Courtney. I got a second. >> I thank you, Dave. Um we got a motion and a second to um continue this hearing
until December 17. I will call rule. >> One bird. I >> Steve I >> Ron >> Chris I >> Ronnie >> Bman I >> uh Dave
>> Kent I >> Bill >> Duffy I >> Jim >> McGrath I >> and Robbins is an I. That's uh unanimous. That hearing is continued until December 17th. Uh next um for of
course for continuance is 15 Derry Lane LLC 15 Derry Lane and zero Rand Beach Road. Map/osel number is 05 03 001B 0000 Fmouth Mass for permission to
construct a common dock. Jen >> yes Mr. Chairman the applicant is requesting a continuence until January 21st. So move >> second. >> Okay, we have a motion and a second to continue until what was the date on
agent? >> January 21st. >> January 21st. Sorry. So January 21st. Any other comments or questions by the commission? Hearing none, I'll call a role. Courtney I. >> Steve I. >> Ron
>> Biscal I. >> Ronnie >> Bman I. >> David >> Kentai. Bill >> Duffy I >> Jim >> McGrath I >> and Robins is an I unanimous to continue that hearing until January 21st. Um next
up is a request for continuence under an enforcement order. John G. But Mary Ellen But of 41 Mary Emanuel Way found mass unpermitted construction of deck fence removal of
trees and clearing vegetation without conservation jurisdiction. >> Yes, Mr. Chairman. Um the resident needs a bit more time. So we are recommending a continuence until
December 10th. >> December 10th. >> Yes. >> Birds. So move second. >> Okay. So we got a motion and a second. Continue until December 10th. Any other
comments or questions by the commission? Hearing none. I will call the role. Courtney >> Bird I. >> Steve I. Ron >> Chris, >> hold an eye. >> David, >> I
>> Bill >> Duffy I >> Jim >> Grath I >> and Robins is an I. It's unanimous. They can continue that hearing until December 10th. Uh request for determination of applicability.
Um Evan Leaport 187 Showwood Drive found ask for permission to reconstruct an existing deck. Uh Alissa >> staff recommends a negative three under the state and a negative two under the bylaw. Resource area boundaries are not confirmed.
>> So move second. >> Okay. So we have a motion and a second to uh accept staff's recommendation for 187 Shawwood Drive. Any other comments or questions for the commission? Um, hearing none, I'll call
a roll. Courtney >> Bird I. >> Steve >> I. >> Ron >> Priscali. >> Ronnie >> Bowman I. >> David >> Kent I. >> Bill >> Duffy I. >> And Jim
>> McGrath I. >> And Robbins is an I. So we're unanimous to continue. Um, I'm sorry to accept staff's recommendation. And next up, I've got to step aside um and turn it over to Vice Chair Courtney Bird.
>> All right. So, next up, uh, uh, request for determination of ability, Bman's Beach Club Condominium Trust, 140 Chapoy Road, Balmouth, Mass for permission to replace an existing tennis court,
reconstruct a fence, prune vegetation, and remove invasive species. Um, uh, who's doing it, Alyssa? >> Yes. Uh, staff recommends a negative three under the state and a negative -2 under the bylaw. Resource area
boundaries are not confirmed. >> Duffy so moved. >> Fiscal second. >> All right, we have a motion and a second uh to um uh for a negative determination. Are there any um questions or comments? Hearing none,
I'll call for the vote. Steve Patton I. Um Jim McGrath >> McGrath I >> and Bill Duffy >> Duffy I >> uh Dave Kent >> Kent I
>> Ron Driscoll >> Driscoll I >> Ron Bowman >> Bowman I >> and Bird I. Um the motion is carried. Uh, next up, I'll turn it back to uh our
esteemed chair. >> Thank you, Courtney. Appreciate it. >> No problem. >> Next up is uh Timothy Connley, 18 White Cabs Drive with Mass for permission to reconstruct an existing
dock. Um, Alyssa, >> staff recommends a negative three under the state and a negative two under the bylaw. Resource area boundaries are not confirmed. Birds move. >> Driscoll second. >> All right. So, we have a motion in a
second to accept staff's recommendation. >> One question. >> Yes. >> Is it a typo? It says in the minute in the uh agenda that it's an existing deck and you said it's an existing dock. >> Oh, I apologize. >> It's a deck. >> It's a deck. >> Deck. Thank you.
>> It's It's a deck. Okay. >> It's a deck. Sorry. >> I just want to know what we were voting on. >> All right. So, we have a motion and a second. So, >> any other comments or questions? Hearing none, I'm going to call a roll.
Courtney >> Bird, I >> Steve >> Mattton. I >> Ron >> Escali. >> Ronnie. >> Bman. I >> Davis >> Kent. I >> Billy. I >> McGrath I
>> and Robins is an I. unanimous to accept staff's recommendations uh to reconstruct an existing deck. All right. Next up is um Sylvia Bartell 174 Aapesca Road Fmouth with Mass for
permission to install a new title 5 sewage disposal system. Um Alyssa. >> Yes. So the project will require a continuence until December 3rd. U move for to continue until the 2nd of December. Bird
>> second. >> Okay, we have a motion and a second to continue until December 3rd. Any other comments or question by the commission? Okay, hearing none, I'll call the role. Courtney >> I. >> Steve I.
>> Ron. >> Bowman. I >> Steve I. >> Bill Duffy. I >> Jim >> McGrath I >> and Robins is an I. That's unanimous to continue until December 3rd.
Um Michael Aerrera 71 Ticket Path Fmouth Mass for permission to replace and relocate an existing dock piles and to replace an existing float. Uh Alissa
>> staff recommends a negative two under the state and bylaw. Resource area boundaries are not confirmed. >> Birds move. >> Driscoll second. >> Okay. So, we have a motion and a second to accept staff's recommendation 71 um D ticket path. Any other comments
or questions by the commission hear? None. I'll call the role. Courtney >> Bird I. >> Steve >> Bton I. >> Ron >> Piscll I. >> Ronnie >> Bman I. David >> Kent I >> Bill
>> Duffy I >> Kim >> McGrath >> I >> and Robins is an I. It's unanimous to accept staff's recommendations. Um let me see continued request for a hearing under notice of intent. Uh the first one up is um
we've already read it's 110 grant now. So I'll move on to David and Katherine Greco. 42 Shake and F of Mass for permission to construct a porch, install a patio,
conduct invasive species management, and install a mitigation plant base. And who we got up? We got um Oh, hey Tim. >> Yes, Mr. Chairman. I've promoted Tim Santos from Mel Engineering up to present his continued project.
>> Thank you, Tim. Good evening, Tim. >> Good evening. For the record, Tim Santos from MAL Engineers representing the applicant. Uh, with your permission, I will share my screen. >> Please do. >> Everybody see that? >> Yep.
>> All righty. Um, this project was continued from about a few weeks ago, a month ago, to address staff concerns under the original staff report. So, I'll kind of review the project because it's never been opened. So, uh, projects located at 42 Shaker Lane along Borne's
Pond. Currently develop an existing single family home deck along the rear of the house with a walkway that accesses the uh, Borne Pond resource areas on or within the 100 ft of the property at Salt Mos the pond itself. salt marsh along the pond, coastal bank
that wraps along the eastern side of the house and then the southern side and uh part of the property is in land subject to coastal storm lodge everything to the south of this orange line. Uh we filed an application with the
board to do some redevelopment on the property. The applicant's looking to do some house modifications on the land side as well as the seaside of the house. On the landwood side, we're proposing to construct the porch in this area here as well as reconfigure some
stepping stones that lead from the front entrance to the driveway and a minor enlmentment to the driveway as well. Um, on the Seawward side, we're looking to reconfigure a set of steps on this deck that do not match the plan from 2009. So
at some point in time, I believe it was 2014 2015, this deck was reconstructed and the steps came towards the pond um without a permit. So we're going to modify that to make sure that the steps are in the correct location and they go
down adjacent to the deck and we are proposing a patio as well. Um, this project also includes mitigation plantings under the redevelopment portion of bylaws. Um, there's an increase, if you look at the mitigation
calculation exhibit, there's an increase of 759 square ft in the A and 136 ft in the B, which require 2549 ft of mitigation plantings. And we are proposing 2,753
ft of mitigation plantings. They wrap around the back side of the house and come up along the coastal bank as shown here on this hatch dashed hatch area. Um, also part of this project is a bank invasive restoration project. Um,
they're going to remove all the invasives on the bank. Once that's uh been up to snuff and the invasives are gone, it'll be replanted. It's approximately 1376 square ft. Uh, I believe this area is
about 95% invasive. Um, if you want to know more about the invasive portion of the project, uh, Tyler is on as well and he can answer any questions that you might have. In regard to the staff report, I believe we addressed all the concerns with this
revised plan from the original report and then received a new staff report with a few minor comments and I did send back my comments to Jen and Melissa this morning and I believe if we close this hearing tonight, we could submit a
revised plan to address them. Basically, there's a tree kind of in this area. Actually, let me go to the landscape panel. There's a tree in this area right here. It's a uh a cedar. If uh staff and the board feel it's too closer to the house, we can move it and field locate
it with staff's approval at a later date and refill that area in with Bayberry. And then the other main concern was some of the mitigation plantings are in the B zone. Uh we can easily move them into
the A zone and revise the landscape plan. Um and that could be conditioned. So, if the board has any questions or concerns, I'd be more than happy to address them and I'll stop sh. >> All right, Tim. Thank you.
>> Um, let's start off with Alyssa. Do you want to take this one? >> Only if Jen doesn't. >> Doesn't matter to me. >> Okay. >> You did the review. You can do it. >> Sure. Um, thanks Tim. Yes, we did get your notes. Thank you for clarifying um
that those are not walls are sort of just edging. Um yeah, I just had concern with the tree still in that area. It's just it's awkwardly close to the property line on one side and the house on the other. So I'm just concerned about when it reaches maturity um if it'll be in a predicament
over there. Um and then I think relocating the mitigation into the egg would be preferred just based on the regulations. Um, that's really all I had. Thank you for addressing our many other initial comments.
>> All right, Jen. >> Um, Tim, did you address the And I don't see it in your notes. Did you address the plethora down by the
um by the marsh and more salt tolerant species might be a little bit more appropriate? I think you said that you were looking to have a different uh species in that area and we can add that to the revised landscape plan. >> Okay, perfect.
>> Thank you. >> Not a problem. Sorry. >> Thank you. >> You good, Jen? >> Yes, >> Courtney. >> No questions, >> Steve. >> Thank you everybody for taking care of those issues.
>> Ron, >> yeah, just good luck with all those plant things. It seems to be a massive job. I hope they survive. That's all. >> Ronnie, >> no comment. >> Uh Dave, >> I'm all set.
>> Bill, they're already working with Alyssa and Jen. Then I'm good with it. >> Jim, >> no questions. >> Okay. I don't have anything either. Jen, do you have everything um you need? So, we maybe canitate a motion. Yeah, we can condition what we need and we'll work
with Tim to get a revised plan into the record and uh record it. And there is nothing in the public chat regarding this project. Mr. Chairman, >> thank you. >> No problem. >> Mr. Chair, I'll make a motion to close the hearing and take it under advisement. >> Second.
>> Thank you. Thank you. Quote. We have a motion to second to take close the hearing and take it under advisement. Any other comments or questions? And we all we're cool in chat. So I'm going to call the roll. Courtney, this is the >> bird. I
>> Steve. >> Ron >> Chris. I >> Ronnie >> Bulman. I >> Dave >> Pente. >> Bill >> Duffy. I >> Jim >> Jim McGrath I
>> and Robins is an I. So we're unanimous. This hearing is closed. >> Thank you for your time. Have a great weekend everybody. Have a good holiday, too, because I won't see you till after the holidays. So, >> all right. Same to you. >> Right, Tim. >> Good night.
>> All right. Next up is uh 15 Dairy Lane, which has been continued previously. Uh so next up is Stephen and Suzanne Algier 14 Brigetti Lane um East Falmouth for after the-act permission to
reconstruct and enlarge a deck to install associated mitigation plantings and to vista prune according to FWR 10.1810B. A Jen. >> Yes, Mr. Chairman. I promoted Tom Bunker
up to present his continued project. >> Yes, thank you. Um, thank you. Thank you for allowing me to get get the plans in. Uh, just have a oneweek continuence from from last time. Um, and I'll go into that if I can put my share my screen up right now. Go
right ahead. I'm gonna uh put the plan up. Okay. So there were a couple uh couple problems we had and one the uh this we're part of part part of this project is to uh request a vista pruning
and so uh Alyssa noticed that these vista pruning lines went went off the property onto the budding property. This is a not totally unusual, but the property line is partway up the bank and this other land the so this lot has no
frontage down on on Green Pond and so of course the Vista pruning and the permission you give has to end at the property line which is which is right there. The main reason we are here is that I guess it's related to Vista pruning because um
Suzanne Aljerry came to talk to Alyssa uh about Vista pruning and when Alyssa came out saw the deck was bigger than had uh been uh than bigger had been expanded since since the last record of the the house being built.
And so uh we did obtain a uh a plan of the this is from the when when before they bought the house this orange line there was a the deck was this big and it's now this
this full deck out here. We we did that plan. Um and then there were two comments in the staff report and one that we did not have um the uh the DPW uh the the BVW
data sheets for this BVW down at the bottom on the other other land. And two, um, Alyssa also added that these stepping stones should be added to the plan cuz
they were not all shown on some of those aerial photographs. So, we added that last Friday. Mark Manganello uh went to the site and uh he's discussed this with uh his staff
several times how he can't go onto a budding property without the property owners permission and flag a wetland. Uh so he went down there and wrote a memo um which I unfortunately just got today.
uh sent that to staff uh basically agreeing what with what we had done that the there is wetland up here and the break is between the wetland and the upland is a obviously a distinct break in the slope uh right
down this line right here. So he did not do data sheets. He just observed took some pictures and wrote a memo and he the conclusion was that this is certainly good enough for the uh he he
in his opinion is good enough to proceed the way we have it drawn is good enough for the the purposes of of this this uh plan. Uh the we put these um stepping stones in
and these were left over. The there the photos that um Alyssa showed showed these stones on an earlier photo but not other stones going around in this direction.
Um, and uh, the owner. So, we put these on the plan. And so, I have all of these, the ones that are gray, uh, labeled to remove them all. So, in here, there's 23 stepping stones along here, and there are 29 stepping stones
here, and including these three up here. So this plan is removing all of those but retaining six stepping stones down here which is uh uh
21 square ft of mitigation. And I just got an email earlier earlier today um that she would like to leave only two of the stepping stones. So there
there's where'd you go there? Two two of the stepping stones right here and the others she'd like to remove also. So that would get you know reduce the uh reduced by a little bit some of the mitigation in here. Uh, she said they
were just left over from from other things. There there was a pile of them for when they, you know, without a permit expanded the deck, but they just had a bunch of these stones left over and put them out there and they don't need them. She'd like to
take them off also. So, um, then we do have the, uh, you know, the 2:1 mitigation. There's a coastal bank flood zone is is down here and the coastal bank extends a little bit above the flood zone where it's the bank is uh
4 to one or steeper. Um the bank touching a wetland has a 50ft uh zone A which is here. Salt marsh 100 foot zone A. They run through sort of the the wooded area on the slope and
where the mitigation is going to go. So all of this work up to this point is in zone B. So we have the mitigation calculations uh for 2:1 over there. Um which comes out to filling in there's a
bare area here. No no no grass or anything under these trees. And so that's where we're putting the mitigation planting. Um so that's it. I would just ask that if you if you can close the hearing tonight, I just ask
that I can change the mitigation slightly to show four more stones being removed. Anyway, I will take this down and then um take your questions. >> All right, Tom, thank you. Um Jen, >> no questions, Mr. Chairman. Tom, we can
work with you on a revised plan. Alyssa. >> Uh, just one comment, Tom. If we can switch out the low bush for something else on the planet. >> Oh, that's right. Comment. I forgot that. You're right. >> Perfect. Thank you.
>> All right. So, let's start off with Steve. >> Thank you. But I don't have any questions. Thanks for settling everything once again. >> Thank you, Steve. Ron, >> I'm all set. Thank you, >> Ronnie. All set. Thank you,
>> Dave. >> Alyssa, could you explain what's going on with the uh Vista pruning? I'm not I'm not very familiar with that to tell you the truth. >> Uh yeah, the concept of Vista pruning. >> Well, what are they going to do in this situation? >> Yeah. So in order to vista prune they can choose a 20 foot 25 foot wide
corridor um for properties that don't already have a view similar to that uh in which we can approve selective removal of branches on the existing trees to create more pockets of view. Um so it's not stripping a tree you know um it's not clearing it up one side or the
other. It's very selective cuts to help um maintain the health of the tree. We can allow select saplings to be removed to enhance the view while keeping them and the rest of the buffer. Um, not all saplings because we need that natural succession. Um, in the backyards because
eventually those trees, you know, they will come down at some point. Um, and then we allow the existing shrub layer to be brought down to a height of 5 ft. Uh, the shrub layer in the backyard here is already pretty low. I wouldn't doubt maybe it was mowed a couple years ago. There's no immediate signs of cutting.
Um, so that's not really applicable in this situation. Um, but there certainly are uh a couple saplings that we could work with and some tree branches. Um, I have yet to meet with the certified arborist, but as Tom noted in his narrative, um, that will be a requirement when that time comes just so we can have the right scope of work.
>> So, so that that meeting you're going and doing all this in particular, that's coming. It's not been that's this hasn't been done yet, but it's coming. Yeah. >> Yeah. Typically, when we see Vista pruning, it's a kind of a standalone part of a project. So you see it mostly under RDAs and before it comes to you, we make sure that we get that done.
Since we have the ability to condition on NOIs and it's usually part of a larger project, we don't always meet the arburist right away. Um so it will be a requirement going forward. >> Thank you. I'm all set. >> All right. Thanks, Dave. Bill,
>> no questions, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. >> Uh Jim, >> no questions. >> And I have more questions. Um, Jen, do you have everything and you're comfortable with closing this? >> We are comfortable with closing, Mr. Chairman. And there is no chat on this project.
>> Okay, that was my second question. All right. So, are there any other comments or questions by the commission? >> I don't have any. You forgot to call on me. >> Oh, I'm sorry, Court. >> How could How could I forget you? >> I know. >> Getting in the corner.
>> That's all right. I don't have any comments. All right. Since Cody doesn't have any other comments, I will call >> I'll move to close the hearing and take it under advisement. >> We have a motion. >> Courtney. >> Bird. I
>> Steve >> Patton I >> Ronis I >> Bman I >> Dave >> K I. >> Bill >> Duffy I >> Jim >> Wrath I Robbins is an eye. unanimous. This hearing is closed.
Thank you, Tom. >> Thank you. >> Night, Tom. >> Thanks, Tom. >> Good night. >> All right. >> Next up is Michael and Marne Farrell, 202 Edgewater Drive East LLC. 202
Edgewater Drive East, uh, East Falmouth, Mass for permission to construct a dock. Jen. >> Yes, Mr. Chairman. I'm promoting Mike Borceli up to present his project. This project has
been opened. >> Okay, Mike. >> And listen, do we have the quorum? >> Yes. Um, so I think it's everybody except Ronnie, but and Jim. >> Jim, >> did we only we only met once for this so
far, right? I think so. >> Okay, then I think it's everybody. And I got overzealous one day and did check marks. >> All right, >> we're good to go. >> Yes, you are, sir. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the commission. For the record, Mike
Borelli, Felmouth Engineering, and I represent the applicant. Um, in addition uh to me, I believe Darren Creel from Megalodon is probably in the audience. if there's specific questions for him about the shellfish
survey and the accompanying report that was submitted with the application. I will share my screen and just go through the project. I did I did go through the project I think at one of the previous hearings. There were there
was a continuence, but just to refresh your memory, the the property in question is at 202 Edgewater Drive East. It has water frontage on eel pond. The wetland resources of note are land under the ocean.
Land containing shellfish. There's a um salt marsh at the base of a um stone uh rip wrap. The the rip wrap and the adjoining land is sloping and it meets the definition of a coastal bank.
So we've identified the top of the coastal bank on the plan as well. The uh property has a uh existing uh modest size house, driveway, lawn areas.
There's a deck on the side here. The proposal before you is uh to request permission to construct a a private recreational pier which is shown centered on the on the waterfront. The pier has been designed
to meet your standards for uh width, length, alignment. Um a shellfish survey was uh performed by Megalodon. The report was submitted. We
did water depth sound uh measurements and uh if you make reference to the plane this the water depths are demonstrated to be um more than the minimum 3 ft of water depth reference to mean low water.
We had an initial uh meeting with the harbor master when we first designed the alignment of the dock to make sure he had no issues with the project and he has commented. I believe this one mooring may need to be relocated. That
would be under his direction and at the expense of the applicant. Uh we show a mooring field on the side of the dock here. This is where the boat would be intended to be tied. We understand and we expect you'll have
a condition that there only be one boat as is your custom. The here is uh designed as we typically do and you've seen on a number of occasions. I'm going to share
uh details with you. Now this is a profile of the pier. It starts at the top of the seaw wall. There's a one uh level section and then it transitions down to a lower level
uh but not the final lowest level. This intermediate level is shown here to provide the required uh distance above the salt marsh which is a DMF policy of
um 1 and a half times the width of the pier. So since the pier is 4 ft wide, we're demonstrating that we're providing 6 ft minimum from the underside of the stringers uh where we cross the salt marsh.
In addition, this elevated section also demonstrates that uh it meets the 5-ft separation from meanh high water for public access along the waterfront. Um this section will be entirely through
flow decking 50% sunlight penetration which is a requirement of your local regulation. And then once we cross that uh we transition down one more time to the final level of the dock which is closer
to the uh mean high water level but still high enough to not be flooded at um moon high tides. There's a cross-section uh showing how the how the construction
will be um performed with the timbers and the framing. The piles are 10 in diameter and they're spaced uh 16 ft on center which is uh typical. I think that basically
um explains what we're proposing. Uh the staff report, there were some previous comments at um an earlier staff report um that we've addressed that included
um that there should only be one mooring field, that we originally had another mooring field on this side. Um there needed to be clarity on the through flow decking to make sure that it was in all ages with salt marsh was crossed.
The your staff pointed out uh that they observed some um gravel area that was installed here near the deck from the driveway that did not have the benefit of a permit. Um so instead of providing mitigation
for that, the applicant elected to remove that and convert it back to um grass. I think the final final comment was relative to these green shaded areas.
Um, on a previous uh application that my company wasn't involved with, there was a prop a deck constructed that needed to have mitigation planting associated with it. And the mitigation planting was um proposed and installed
here and we were asked to uh identify and quantify the mitigation areas. Uh we've done that. We counted the number of plants and measured the spacing in these areas.
And then using the plant calculator, we calculated the equivalent area of coverage and identified it for each area. For instance, in this area, it's 12 plants, 72 ft. Here it's 32 plants and 248. And then
finally, this is um 11 plants and 76. I I believe your staff thinks this is a little uh shy on what was required. Um I'm happy to work with and the applicant's happy to work with staff to supplement this as necessary.
Um and we're hoping that that could be made a condition of the approval. if you do uh vote to uh close the hearing tonight. I think that sums it up. Um I'm here for
questions and I believe Darren's here for questions as well. >> All right. Thank you, Mike. Um Jen. >> Yes, Mr. Chairman. Um, this project was continued for several weeks while the marine and environmental services
department conducted um an investigation into the project. You've all received Mr. Martinsson's um officer Martinson's um report. It states, "During August of 2025, I've became aware of inconsistencies involving shellfish
surveys conducted as part of the DAW proposal. um NOI application for 202 Edgewater Drive East, Mass. Over the course of my review, I found that the company performing work to support the NOI
conducted two shellfish surveys on the above runs property. The first survey was conducted on September 14th, 2024, and found the Cohog samples in excess of the thresholds outlined in FWR 10.34.
The second survey conducted eight months later on May 3rd, 2025 meets the thresholds of 10.34. And he included the first survey for the board's consideration. So I think at
this point the board needs to determine um what you want to do with both those surveys. The first survey exceeded the threshold count under your regulations. Eight months later, a survey showed it didn't
um meet the thresholds. Um aside from a anonymous tip back in April that um stated they saw the um people
shellfishing in the area and removing large quantities of shellfish. There's that. That's what Mr. Martinson concluded is there's there were two surveys done. The first one wouldn't have allowed a dock to be built. The second one does. That's all I have, Mr.
Chairman. >> Okay. But that again, that anonymous person, we have no idea about that. >> Nope. I know. But but I'm just repeating it because it was stated in the staff report. >> Anything like that. So, >> yep, that's fine.
Alyssa, >> nothing to add. Thank you. >> Okay, Ron, >> I guess you determine whether the shellfish migrate by themselves or someone somehow that area was picked. Is
that is that area open to shellfishing normally? >> Apparently, >> I don't know the answer to that question, Ron. I'm sorry. Um, I don't know the answer to that question. >> And I know when they they do throw those oysters out, um, they just throw them
out in a mass and they could have just picked, you know, I don't know which which survey to believe. I mean, at this point, I'd say wait a couple months and do another survey. They can't Which if both surveys are correct, which one is which is one should we go with?
All right. You know, >> there's there's no velocity zone in Neil Pond, right? >> No, there's not a velocity zone over there, Ron. >> I think so. I just wanted to make that. >> Mr. Chairman, if I could speak to um Commissioner Driscoll's comments just
very briefly. >> Um in my experience doing DOCS, it's common that a survey can be done that exceeds thresholds and and the applicant sort of disappointed and he's told, "Well, try it again." Um wait some time
and try it again. Um sometimes it has less shellfish. Um we don't know why. Sometimes deer is fish. Sometimes it's naturally diminishing in the populations. But the most recent shellfish survey,
which was done in September of 24, is what I think we should be looking at. Uh not the one that was done um I'm sorry, the recent one that was done in May of 25, not the one that was done in September of 24. But I'm not an expert.
I I just know that it's it it happens. Yeah, I know it's not an exact science. >> I mean I mean it's also, you know, it's it's the performance standard we go by when we're trying. It's the most
it's the standard that we have least uh certainty and knowing until we do this survey. We can measure water depths pretty easily. We can determine if we're in a velocity zone by looking at a map. We can talk to the harbor master, but the shellfish survey is the one that
takes a lot of labor and and and a report to to to see if you meet the density threshold. >> All right, I have >> uh Ronnie, I I'll get to all you. I see the hands up, so I'll get to you.
Ronnie, >> I Megalod is a reputable company. um the anonymous person that called in, I would like to see some proof of that. I mean, if someone naturally fished it. So, I have a problem with that. And as a
homeowner, I think they have the right to wait 6 months or a year to uh redo that study to uh to move forward. So, I'm I'm in favor just uh clear up the mitigation issues and and move forward.
>> Okay. You all set, Ron? Yep. >> Thank you, Dave. >> Uh, Jen, do we have experience of uh in other properties of multiple surveys like this coming out different? Have we has this been a challenge to to the
board in the past? >> Not that we're aware of. We wouldn't be privy to that information on other projects, previous projects. >> I know, Dave. And what I'm saying is that no, because we wouldn't have been privy to that information. We were only able
to obtain this information because there was an investigation uh conducted by officer Martinson. So if there had been multiple surveys on properties and we would never have known. >> So the answer is no. We've not we've not faced this before.
>> No, we have not. >> If if I could, it's just important to note if I could that uh you know there was full disclosure. I mean it wasn't wasn't hidden when the questions were asked. The information was provided. All right. You good, Dave? >> I guess I'm with Ronnie. It seems to me
that it's we need to rely on the more current one. That's what I would probably say. >> Okay. Uh, Bill. >> Yeah, I would. Shellfish don't like especially Kogs and oysters don't just get up and move for
the most part and disperse. However, I would like in all fairness to understand if that area is zoned for cohoging. I mean, if if if people can legally go in and actively
shellfish, that would, you know, and I'm also one of these people that especially in, you know, my other line of work is I can't stand anonymous
>> tips, but I get but I get them. But um Jen, if you could ever find out because I wouldn't mind continuing this at least >> to know if that area is at least um
>> allowed for shell fishing because that and that in my opinion could actually understand it. I mean cohogs don't swim, oysters don't swim that far. So, and I I think it would have to take a look at that the surveys a little bit more to
see how different it was as well, whether it was significantly different between surveys and stuff like that. So, I'd have to take a longer look, but I would like to know if that if shell fishing was legal in that area. >> Yes, I can find that information out
from me. I just don't have it available for me tonight for you guys tonight. But if you continue the hearing to December 1st, I can get that information. And um I think it was Alyssa, what did we
determine? Um half. >> Yeah, I believe um >> something like that. >> Yeah, let me I have it right here. >> Dragel's commenting. He maybe he >> Yes, I know, Mike. I see it. >> Okay,
>> Darren, we'll we'll promote you up so you can show us the open areas and I'd want to probably check them uh confirm those with Chuck. I don't accept information at the night of the hearing without confirming it. So, be happy to promote you right now, Darren, if you
don't mind, Mr. Chairman. >> Uh yeah, but I let um I want to go on just get all the questions out of the way here. Then we'll listen to that. Um because I know he's had his hand up for a while. Um Jim, do you have anything? No questions. Chairman, >> um I I'm going to hold for now. Go
ahead, Court. Yeah, the it is concerning that there's this discrepancy and um certainly you don't want to impute any motives to anybody and it may be naturally occurring but
the fact is that uh there's a marked difference in those surveys and it seems to me the easiest thing to do would be to wait about 6 months and do another survey and use that as the basis. is for our judgment.
>> But what are you determining the 6 months to a year on Courtney? If you're going to wait to do another survey, then I would suggest you um get some sort of information from the shellfish constable, how about how long an area
would take to naturally recede itself. >> That's fair enough. I I I threw that out. I what >> if the board's going to go that route, I would definitely want you to get an opinion from Officer Martinsson, who is the shelfish constable.
>> Okay, that's fair enough. But I I I think rather than trying to decide between two dueling surveys and, you know, the fact that the second one meets the standard and the first one didn't, you know,
I'm sorry, but that raises a red flag in my mind. And so I think the cleanest way is to do yet another survey and let that be the determinant. Now and I think I would agree it should
be done according to Martinsson's you know uh what what his findings his recommendation on the timing and so forth. And I and I think in the meantime we should perhaps have some form of
monitoring down there so that you know some kind of nefarious activities are going on. >> Courtney, you want to volunteer for that? >> Yeah. I mean I don't know how how to deal with it, but >> but it troubles me that's all. >> We get it.
>> I think that's beyond the scope. Um Steve, did you Steve, you have anything? >> No, I don't have anything to add. All right, Steve. Thank you. Um, do you want to uh who was um who was it that had the um >> Well, there's two there's two folks in
uh in the audience is is Darren Creel from Megalodoni might want to comment and the owners um making some comments too. >> Okay. I was just going to bring that up. >> Yeah, we'll get to them. Mike, I'm promoting Dan uh um Darren Creel, Mr.
Chairman for Megalodon. >> Yep. and then we'll um see Oh, >> and then I can read the chats. >> Yep. >> Darren, are you there? >> I've promoted him. >> Yes. Can you hear me?
>> Yep. Can't see you, but I can hear you. >> Let me get my camera on here. How about that? >> There you go. >> Thank you, Darren. Hello, >> everyone. Share the screen if you've got something for us to put up on the screen. >> Sure. So this let me know when you can
see it. >> Yep. >> So this is directly from the town of Felmouth website. This is not a map I've created. I've taken this >> directly from the town and it uh shows the areas that are open to shellfishing.
Um for reference uh oh let me move this bar. For reference, 202 Edgewater Drive East is here. Just so that you know where we're looking. This is just a Google Maps image. Um, but please note where it is. It's right around this uh
trifecta right of of Yan. If you go over here, um, this is that area and it appears to be closed or temporarily approved. status closed or Edgewater Drive East closed. So,
um I'm I'm not sure how often these are updated, but as of today, right, I can't. So, last year or September, I'm not sure how frequently these are updated or modified, but the snapshot in time is that it is open to shut.
>> Okay. And if I while I've got the screen, I just in uh trying to be as transparent as possible. Let me know if you can still see this. Are you still Are you looking at the map or are you looking at a report? >> We're looking at a report.
>> Great. So this is the um original report we had 1.4 Khogs per square meter. uh for the original report the followon report had uh 73 cohogs per meter. So uh
11 were collected on the second survey. The first survey had 21. So I I'm trying to be as as upfront and as transparent as possible. I think Jen your your original comment that you know this this does happen. People do ask for
second or follow-on surveys um a period of time after the first survey if the first survey is not going to allow them to to achieve a dock. These surveys really are snapshots in time. >> The environment is constantly changing
and moving. Um and and I think you're right, Bill, in your comment that the the shelfish just don't get up and and leave. Um but the there is something to be said about having a shelfish survey. You know, we we are there's quite a bit
of disturbance. We we are raking a a cubic foot of sediment up from uh the the seafloor and we civ it down to, you know, a quarter of an inch. So we are disturbing a a large portion of the seafloor. And we're doing this every
five feet out parallel to shore and 10 feet uh perpendicular to shore. So it's it's a it's a pretty big disturbance. And while we do put those cohogs back in to the water where we found them, uh they
are exposed. They've been ripped out of their homes and sediment. And it it is possible. I don't I'm not trying to say that this is something that happens or it is or it isn't. But I just want to note that because of that disturbance, it's possible that they relocate, right?
They've got that foot that they drag around and can essentially lick the ground to move and and find a new home. So I I I understand that um you know that it's not a blink of an eye where you're going to see shellfish change, but after a disturbance like a shelfish
survey, it is likely that or it is possible that you know the shelfish may not have dug right down where where we collected them. But what? So, so Darren, can I ask you that that
map that you have up of the shell fishing areas, what's closed and what's open? >> Yeah. >> Okay. And that and could you point out where that project is right about there? >> Let let me show you directly. You can make the judgment call. This is uh
Edgewater Drive East. 202 Edgewater Drive East is right here. So River, you can see there's a pinch here and it's right off the tip of that island. >> Um, so Spit River, that's the island. It's right there.
>> And just outside of that, we have this forest green area. I'm assuming that's okay to fish then. >> Yeah. I don't know who drew these lines. >> I'm curious. >> Well, that's a shellfish grant. >> Oysters are propagated there. That's Cit
River. Yeah. >> Okay. And that would would that have any effect on the population in that area? I'm I don't know. That's why I'm just asking. >> I can get that information from you, Russ, from uh from Chuck. I can ask him.
>> Okay. >> And I can also ask him to >> confirm these maps that Darren, thank you Darren uh is showing. And also >> Yeah, there. >> Thank you. and then also to see if he
has information about when the time periods that the two surveys were done, if those areas were opened or closed, he should have that information. So, um, you know, I think if the board has more questions, again,
let me consult with Mr. Martinson get some of your questions um and comments kind of answered and addressed and we can go from there. >> Yeah, I would appreciate that. I mean the N is so low and the cohogs between
each side if you know between 23 and 11 individuals depending on the time and if there is shell fishing and the whole anonymous thing. Um, >> yeah, >> Chuck can give us a tiny bit more information. >> You know, I' I'd like to go with sort of
the later one, but I just want to make sure because >> I hate anonymous. Just, you know, all right, this happened. Well, explain it more, please. >> And you guys want shellfish maps from Chuck? >> I got you.
>> And then historical, meaning like the time if we have them, whether they were opened or closed. Correct. Yep. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. In between if there was actually allowable shellfishing. >> Yeah, >> that would I can get that information. And then how long to wait between
surveys? >> Yep. You can stop sharing. Uh um somebody's okay. >> Well, sorry. I just wanted to point that this is directly from I I appreciate Jen your your desire to get it from Chuck, but I just want to suggest that it is
straight from the fmouth.gov website. I don't >> Is that their page? Because I'm on GIS and I don't see that. But you must be on me's page, but I'll get the information from when those two surveys are done as well.
But yeah, I can >> information too. >> And and it does say closed seasonally. So, you know, what does that mean? >> Yeah, I'll get I'll see if I can get the information. >> Um, Ron Driscoll, I apologize, Ron.
>> Yeah, just a qu Darren, just a question on the sampling. Um, it's such a small area and you've taken so many samples. So when you take that second set of samples, you're actually taking the sample area sample
cohogs or whatever the the mud. Um you're taking them from the same area you took them the first time, right? >> Right. Yeah. That's how the regs are written. Yep. >> Yeah. So I mean if you take the cohogs out the first time, they're not going to be there when you're back there the second time. >> He puts them back
>> put them back in the same place back in the same place. >> Yeah. >> Put them right back. But they they have feet. They have this weird tongue foot thing that they move around. So I I mean it it's they're not immobile. They do move.
>> Okay. We'll get more information. Thank you. >> Wait, Dave, did you have something? Can I can I have the two dates for the two surveys again? Is that possible? >> Yeah. Uh September
>> 14th. September 14th, 2024 and May 3rd, 2025. >> And one last question, what is the threshold? >> One cohog per square one even. Okay, thank you. That's it for me. >> Per square meter meter.
>> Okay, you collected >> D. You're a scientist. It's a square yard. 9 by9 by 9 >> if we're going to get down to it. >> It It sounds like a continuence on this.
Mike, um Jen, do you think you can get that information by December 1st? >> I can try. >> Let's Isn't it December 3rd? >> Yes, December 3rd. Um but um I can um actually No, it's No, it's Yeah,
December 3rd. You're right, Mike. I can get that information. I have like Darren showed the current shellfish maps, but you guys want to know the information on those maps from those two dates. I'm sure Chuck has that. Um, how long to
wait between another survey? Uh, we'll get some clarification from Chuck. Um, but it would I uh from speaking with him, I think it's like well over a year, but I I'll double check and have him put that in writing for you guys. And then I
think it was Ron or Ron wanted to know how um Cape Cod Oysters could affect or maybe it was you Russ how the shellfish grant could affect the area over by 202
right? >> Yeah. >> Did I cover everything? >> I have one more. I have one more thing. Yeah. >> Can uh can someone comment to tell us I mean you know do do shellfish move around? I mean is it are there are there are there
natural natural occurrences between these dates that that uh we've seen they've seen before which could make this uh common sense this change. Do do shellfish die? Do they move away? >> Darren is right. Shellfish can move.
They don't move very far, but they they do move. So, I wasn't trying to say that they just >> Well, does that does that make it with such a movement be likely to cause this change? For example, >> that's what I'm asking if an expert can tell us that. >> I will ask Chuck that question.
>> Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you. >> I'm not asking you, Bill. >> All right. Thank you. I think after I think after a disturbance like a shellfish survey where we collect and and raise those shellfish out of the
water and then put them back in that is a disturbance and and that's a pretty big event. So, and to Ronald's point, we're going back out to rake the same locations. It's surprising we get 11 shellfish, right? I think uh you know,
if we've dug them up and then you go back and you expect to dig up the same number, uh that's pretty unlikely. So, um I I think if that's context to their moability, we we've disturbed them with
the shelter silly. >> Yeah. And if it if the season was open to shellfish, too. That's another one. When what when is it open? When is it closed? So, that has barriers. >> And I will get that information for you guys. >> And the anonymous person said someone's cohoging. So, someone could throw seed
out there the same the same person. So yes, >> this anonymous I >> I'm not even going to listen to that >> talking about it. >> Yeah, >> I just that's just >> stop talking about it, guys. You want to throw that out? Throw it out. Now we're faced with the two surveys. >> Can I make a motion to uh continue us to
December 3rd? Seeing that I think that's where we're going anyways. >> Please. >> I think my client would like us to speak. >> Oh, I apologize. >> Hey, hey, hey, please. >> Sorry, Mike. the the the applicants are here and we they have every right to
speak tonight and I'd like to hear from them. So >> can we can we arrange that? >> Yes. >> Do you want to promote them, Mr. Chairman? I can do that. >> Yep. >> Sure. >> We're here and they do they got every right to speak. So
>> yeah, no, I don't I think Bill just didn't realize. So it's okay. We're going to promote him. I'm don't know why I just promoted Tom Bunker. So I'm going to get him out of here. >> Oh, wait. Tom spare other project. >> Okay, hang hang on. I got to figure out how to get Tom out of here. Hold on,
Tom. I'm getting you out. Got to go over here. Where are you, bunker? There you are. Roll to attendee. Okay, Darren's still here. The fererals are here and Tom is back where he
belongs as an attendee. There we go. Mr. Chairman, >> thank you very much. Chen, uh, Mr. and Mrs. Farrell, I'll give you the floor for three minutes. >> All right. Thank you very very much. We appreciate um you guys taking this up on
our behalf. Just a couple of things that we want uh to point out is that the the first survey missed by literally three um cohogs. So it was very very uh close. Uh and in fact in the first survey Pam
recommended that um that we be allowed to build a dock and uh Mike uh is aware of the fact that we were over the threshold and that it it didn't it wouldn't make sense uh to do that because it would never be approved if we were over uh that threshold. Um,
>> and the reason for the second one so quickly, uh, our contractor out of the blue texted in February or March and said, "Hey guys, if you're thinking about doing a dock, uh, not even realizing that we had done the survey,
um, he commented that there was going to be some changes potentially that could affect uh, July, affect um, dock regulation. So by July 1st, so we were kind of, oh
my god, we've put all this investment into the engineer, we've put the investment into the shellfish survey, so what's, you know, what route do we take now? And so we all decided, all right, let's do another shellfish survey. Um, and and see where we come out. So
>> and then and and then also it was it was mentioned, I think Darren had mentioned that the difference in cohogs between the two areas, and it's a big area. The first one was 21 and the second one was 11. Somebody in the meeting referred to 23 being the second number, but it it
was 21 I believe. And maybe Darren you can uh confirm that. And um thirdly, um the these shellfish surveys are expensive. So to the extent that um you know that we can avoid that, we would
rather obviously we need to make sure that the shellfish uh is accurate. Um, but uh these are expensive ventures. So, I just want to point that out. >> And then also just uh right by our house is an easement that's
uh used quite a bit um to get to have the neighborhood and anyone have access to the water. Uh there's no signs that say no fishing or anything like that to deter anyone. I I don't know if people would know to go on the Felmouth website
to think, oh, there's nothing allowed here, especially seeing all the oyster fishing happen like right in that area. So, um this just seems to be kind of uncontrollable um for for that area and the area in
particular that we're in. So, just wanted to make those comments. >> Okay. >> Thank you very much for your time. We we appreciate it. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Jen. Is there any chance that Chuck could come in? >> You think we get Chuck to show off? Uh,
>> yeah, that'd be a great idea. >> I can ask. >> It would be. >> I mean, he did he did, you know, he did offer. So, if the board would like to hear from your shelfish, constable. Absolutely. I can see if he is available. >> Yeah. >> Yeah, I can I can request that. Um,
uh, I can see what his availability is. Um, I think at this point you should continue it out to December 3rd. Um, and if Chuck can make it, great. If if not, then let me find a a a night that he may
be able to join us. >> Okay, >> that sounds good. So, do we have a mo did somebody make a motion to build? Did Bill, did you make a motion to continue to the third? >> I did, but it looks like there's a couple of hands up with the board. So I
will >> and I I second >> let's go for a second and allow what >> Mr. Chair I seconded it. >> Okay second >> I just have one question. >> Do we know whether there's a fairly fair fair amount of
>> current in that area in other words the water moves a lot or is it pretty much still water >> the tip there? >> I can find that up from Chuck. Yeah, I know from local bearing on the question of >> local boating knowledge. I know there's
there can be some current there. >> Yeah, I mean the tide's coming in and out. You got to have water movement. The water's moving in and out with the tide. >> There's a lot of current that cohogs can move. >> Ron, did you have Ron Driscoll? >> I just one quick question. If you average the two surveys, is it fail or
pass? >> Darren, uh, give me a second. Give me a second. I run the >> this barely pat fail >> regarding the current the the cohos you get washed away but some could get washed in as well. So this is like
but I'm just trying to see if there's something in nature that accounts for those guys moving unnaturally. That's all. >> Yeah. But that's a friendly question. >> Yeah. Yeah. I know. So,
>> so we're waiting for Darren to give us a He's just going to do an average, I guess. >> We It's going to continue. Well, you could that could be an answer. >> The average is 1.07. >> 1.1 just to try 1.1. Yeah. >> Yeah.
>> Okay. All right. So, we got a motion in a second. Um, anything else in the chat, Jen? That looks clear to me. on only the pharaohs. If you'd like me to read the chat into the record, I can. Um, it's up to you, Mr. Chair.
>> Is that Did you cover um what you had in the chat? >> I I think they did about they thought the dock rags were changing, which was never a thing. I don't know where that groomer came from. And Mr. or Mrs. Farrell, if you ever have any questions about our rags, you know how to reach
me. Um, no. There's nothing new, Mr. Chairman. >> Very good. So, I'm going to go ahead and uh call a role here then to continuous to December 3rd. Courtney >> I uh Steve
>> Patton I >> Ron >> Eis. >> Ronnie Goldman. >> Dave >> Penty. >> Bill >> Cafe. Jim >> McGrath I >> and Robins is an I. So that's unanimous.
We're continuing until December 3rd for more information and hopefully it would be nice if Chuck could join us because that man's got a wealth of information. >> Yep. I can see Officer Martin sir will join you. >> That's good. All right. Thank you very
much. >> Thank you. >> All right. So, next up is continued hearings under enforcement order. And the first one that's 41 Mary Emanuel Way has been continued already. Uh Susan and
Maurice um Ryan 32 Squib Knocket has been also continued. Uh then next up is Robert and Terresa McGloin trustees 65 Bourne Pawn Road. Police found mass unpermitted cutting, removal of buffer
zone vegetation, and installation of hardcape within juris conservation jurisdiction. Jen, >> uh, I'm going to kick this one to Alysa, Mr. Chairman. >> Alyssa,
>> sorry about that. >> Thank you. I'm also just promoting the homeowner. Um, I'm not sure if Tom Bunker will want to join as well. Um so we continued this hearing just so the commission could visit the property and review the staking on site. Uh in
particular the Vista corridor was staked um for your review in addition to the proposed restoration area. Um the staff has been working with Tom and the Mloffins to bring this project uh to a close here and they just have a couple
more items to um take place this fall and this spring. Um, so I believe everything has been addressed and everyone's on the same page, assuming the commission is content with uh what they reviewed on site.
>> All right. So, do we um Mr. Mclofflin? >> Yes. Hi. >> How you doing? Do you uh do you have anything for us? you want to make a statement or you going to just be here for answer any questions? >> Yeah, I can answer any questions and I
can uh again compliment uh Jen and Alyssa. You know, they've been great partners as well as Tom and we're just uh looking forward to uh we got in a little bit late, but so we're not going to plant this year, but um Tom had a surveyor out and he uh did the staking
for us and uh you know, we have a good idea of how to proceed. All right. Thank you. Um, questions from the commission. We'll start with Ron Driscoll. >> I'm all set. Thank you on this. >> Ronnie,
>> I'm good. >> Dave, >> all set. >> Bill, >> no questions, Mr. Chairman. >> Thank you. Uh, Jim, >> no questions. >> And I have no questions either. Um, Courtney,
>> uh, yeah, just a quick question. When would the actual work start on on this next spring or >> I I um I have to wait on Hamilton who's going to do the u the vista window but uh certainly the planting was will begin
next spring. >> Yeah. >> And then uh I don't know if uh Hamilton is going to wait is going to do it uh sooner or is going to wait um till the spring. >> Okay. depending upon when the viability the best time to you know do the >> absolutely
>> okay thank you >> all right Steve you got anything >> no I don't thank you sir >> all right so let me see don't everybody else is clear anything in chat I don't see anything in
chat in regards to >> nothing in the chat Mr. All right. What's your uh what's your pleasure? We move on from this. Move this on. >> Yes, Mr. Chairman. You're going to close the hearing and vote to issue an enforcement order. >> Yep. And you're good with a Jen. You
guys are >> And we'll put some timelines together um to get the work accomplished. >> Okay. Very good. >> I'll make a motion to issue an enforcement order. >> Fiscal second. >> Okay. We have a motion and a second to
issue a enforcement order. Any other comments or questions? I don't see anything. So, I'm going to move on. Call the role then. Courtney >> Bird I. >> Steve >> Patton I. >> Ron >> I. >> Ronnie >> Bman I. >> Steve
>> P. I. >> Bill. >> Duffy. I >> Jim >> McGrath I. >> And Robins is an I. So it's unanimous to issue an enforcement order. All right. Thank you all. Thank you, Mr. Mclofflin. >> Thank you very much. Thank you. Good
night. >> Good night. >> All right. Next up is a vote order of conditions. Frederick P. and Karen E. Collins trustee 16 Clay Path nominee trust 16 Clay Path East Mass. Uh Jen,
can you review this one for me? >> Yeah, I'm getting there. Mr. chairman. Uh dock dock repair um replacing 16 pilings,
red decking with through flow. Um, we have notes remove stepping stones and gravel and mitigate by a certain date because I guess there's where there's mitigation on site. I mean, uh, elements on site that need mitigation
and they are presently cutting a vista. Um, and we will encourage them and request that they apply for a Vista pruning permit through an RDA process just to get it on a plan done so they
can continue doing what they've been doing without a permit. So, let's just get them permitted. So, um, I think that's about it. Anything to add, Alyssa? >> And to remove the unpermitted float and
no longer more than one boat. Okay. >> Oh, is this the one with the two prop the the unpermitted flips? Is that the kayak one? >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Yeah. There was nothing on site. It must be seasonal.
>> Okay. >> Cool discussion. Bill, I see you got your hand up. You got something? >> Yeah. Quick question on that. Um I think one of the photos had the the three boats hanging out there. So is is part
of the order conditions is like every once in a while someone's popping in to make sure there's not three boats hanging out there like is that supposed to be observed? Is that what we condition or >> it was previously conditioned um when
the dock system was enlarged several years ago? um once an order is closed, we don't just readily have access to a property and we rarely make use of that ability. We always try to schedule something. Um so we we sort of rely on
aerial photos. Um this is a new property owner, so maybe they just didn't know. >> But um >> I was just curious. >> Yeah, that's kind of the best we can do for them. >> No fair. There's so many properties we can't possibly pop in to visit all dock
projects. So, it's usually like if we're visiting a an adjacent parcel, we see something, you know, the harbor master will bring stuff to our attention if he's going up and down the ponds by boat. It it it's a hard thing to enforce, but
we do our we do our best. >> Yeah. I've just sort of seen a little pattern over the last couple of months of well, how many boats have been on this stock? It's only supposed to be one. So, it seems like it's more often than not every once in a while. So, I'm just not sure how I was thinking it.
More curiosity on my part as I'm getting more up to speed in this gig. So, >> correct. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you, Bill. Anything else? All right. So, can I get >> I move to uh issue an order of
conditions as discussed? >> Second. >> Okay, we have a motion and a second to issue uh the order conditions as discussed for 16. Clay Pat. Anything else from the commission hearing? None. I'll call the role. Courtney
>> Bird I. >> Steve. >> Patton. I >> Ron Crystal. I >> Ronny. >> Bulman. I >> Dave >> Pente, >> Bill >> Duffy I >> Jim
>> I >> and Robins is an I. So it's unanimous to issue an order conditions 216 clay path as discussed. Uh next up is James and Janice Healey trustees the Healey
2020 living trust 295 Edgewater Drive West Felmouth Mast. Uh, general. >> Yes, Mr. Chairman. This is another dock repair. Um, again, we're going to make a finding that the current mitigation on
site's not doing well, so that'll need to be replaced. Um, we're going to need a revised plan on this one. This was the one where Mike Borceli stated in the hearing he was actually raising um elevating structure above and we
don't have a cross-section of that. it never mentioned that in the narrative or anything like that. So, we will need a revised plan showing that. So, we have the correct elevation of the dock on file. Um, and
plan and then I have a note that says relocated mitigation. >> Yeah, there's some failed mitigation, some in direct sun, some in full shade. Um, not sure if the conditions led to the demise. Um, but it just should be
evaluated prior to being reinstalled. >> Okay. >> And just a note, I wasn't paying attention before, but Ronnie, you're not on any of these since you weren't here last week. >> Were you telling me I can leave? >> Yes, you can. >> Good.
>> And miss all the fun. >> Uh, Ronnie, actually, call me tomorrow because there's something coming up that we have to pick a day. Sorry guys, before Ronnie leaves, Mr. Chairman, um can you take this one quick vote and then I'll
>> vote what I need to tell you? >> Yeah. >> On this on the 295 is you want me you want to vote on that, Jen? >> Yes, please. >> Okay. You know what though? Hang on a second though. I had a question on this one though. >> Okay.
the the mitigation okay on this you say is failing right Alyssa >> um there's just a couple small sections >> but but is it I mean we had that water restriction all summer along was it from watering I mean what are people supposed to do in that case you
know that's kind of you know they're kind of stuck between a rock and a hard place >> you know >> yeah so these plantings have been installed for more than a couple years um so they probably shouldn't need routine watering as one would have with brand new mitigation which I do know is
exempt from the um drought provisions. There might be certain types of watering that still shouldn't be utilized, but watering in general for new plants um is perfectly fine. We've gotten that cleared through the water department. >> Um I mean they were kind of in
questionable areas from the start. There's definitely a section I didn't have high hopes for. I was I was surprised some of them were actually doing well. Um it's just yeah it could just be a very harsh environment in that particularly in that
direct sun section. They they could been um have been forged a little bit too. >> Okay. All right. Sorry I didn't mean to delay things that. So can we can we get a motion in a second on uh issuing an order conditions on 295
Edgewater Drive West as discussed? Birdso move or second. Sorry if I got beat to the punch. >> I think Ron beat you. And so we have >> second. >> It's hopeless. >> We have a motion, a second. No other comments or questions from the
commissioners. Hearing none, I am going to call the role. Courtney >> Bird I. >> Steve I Ron. >> Ronny's not in it. David >> Kent I >> Bill >> Duffy I
>> Jim >> McGrath I >> and Robbins is a um is an I. So that's unanimous order conditions have been issued for 295 Edgewater Drive West. Jen, it's all yours. >> Okay. Yes, Mr. Chairman. Um, so first off to the watering question, Ross, we
have we consulted with Matt Lannon, the water superintendent, several times this past year on the water restrictions where we were getting calls um from concerned residents. So we we were in touch with the water department. So we we did know that they people could
water. They were getting conflicting information from the water department, but I I I spoke to the superintendent myself >> because I heard that a few times and one guy said he was spoken to >> because he was watering. I thought you could hand water. You couldn't you couldn't >> Yeah. And and it really depends on the
level of drought, but it's something that like we'll work more closely with in the summertimes with the water department. >> Um Okay. And what I needed to remind you all is because we closed some hearings tonight, which is great. I love closing hearings. We have to vote orders and we
don't meet for two weeks. So, we have to have a special meeting for all the new commissioners. Uh this is a we have to have a a meeting just to vote orders of conditions so we can get them out in the in the um the mandated time frame. So,
I guess >> let me my um >> everybody who actually like I've got half retired and half working. Bill, looks like you're going back to work. But you said you have Mondays off.
>> I have Mondays off and then I have evenings free. >> Evening. So, where did Russell just go? >> I just had to get my calendar. That's all. >> Okay, perfect. That's what I thought you were doing. Um, does anyone else have a restriction? I know Russ, it's tough for
you. Bill is off on Mondays and has evenings. Ronnie, are you flexible or not? Like if we did it, >> it has to be a Monday. >> In the morning, like around like sometime in the morning if you wanted to
come into my office and do it. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I can do that. Yeah. >> Okay, Russ. But Rush, you're I think the one that's gonna >> Yeah, cuz 7 to 7 to 9 are my office hours. So, um >> I'm looking at the 24th because I can't
do next Monday possibly. >> I'm not going to be here. >> Do we do we all have to be there as a group? >> No, I need a quorum. >> So, I need four of you there. I need four of you. >> Okay. >> I'm flexible. one. >> I I'm probably out. I'm having a knee
surgery on Friday. >> Okay, you're out. Rush. You're not going to be here on the 24th. >> It could be the 17th. I mean, Alyssa and Fallon can run the meeting. I don't I I just don't know if I'm going to be out of the office on Monday or Tuesday of next week.
>> Well, see the hand surgeon. >> Yeah. If it's in the morning or whatever, like I I do work for the government. I can go in a little bit later. >> Yeah, I can be there. I can I can make certain things happen if >> you doing it by Zoom >> either earlier or later in the day like
as long as >> we do it by Zoom I'm assuming. >> Yeah, we're gonna do it by Zoom. >> Yeah. >> Um Russ, what is your schedule? >> Well, I mean if we could Could we call How do you guys feel about 9:00 on the
17th in the morning? >> I'm good. I have I have a class that gets done 7:30 to 8:30 Monday and Wednesday. So, I could do nine. >> Okay. >> Okay. Everybody that can do nine on Monday the 17th, raise your hand.
>> Okay. I got one, I got two, I got Jim, I got Dave, I got think. Okay, perfect. So, Ron's going to be out and Ronnie, you're going to be out, right? You got a hand surgery, you got knee surgery. >> How How long How long does this take? It's going to take like 15 20 minutes
tops. >> Okay. Okay. >> There's only two that you guys closed. It should take five minutes. >> Five minutes. >> Great. >> Okay. So, we will set a special meeting, Mr. Chairman, Monday the 17th at 9:00 by Zoom.
>> Right. To vote orders only >> and to vote two orders. >> That's it. >> Thank you guys. >> I'll be down in your office. I'll just come down with you when >> Yeah, I may not be there, but Alyssa, if I'm not there, Alyssa's going to be running it. So, you just go into that office. >> No problem.
>> Okay, Ronnie, good night. You can leave. >> Good night all. We'll see you in a couple. Have a good Thanksgiving. >> You byebye. >> Thank you. Good night. >> All right, let's let's get back to our
warm order conditions here. Um, Teresa Lockwood, is that where we are? >> East Famouth, Mass. What's the next one? Order of conditions. What was that about? Do you remember, Alyssa? >> I'm getting it. Um, I have my papers
underneath Amy right here. Um, this one was Yep. We're just reinstalling. Oh, this was uh restoration plantings. I keep getting this one mixed up with the dock with the square float. Alyssa,
um this is just um some restoration needs to be done. The understory was cleared. Uh we met with the property owners. I think the the parent had passed. They inherited the property. It
was discovered that this was done. They're just restoring it. Going to be working with Paul Raosa, I believe. Simple. >> Okay. Right. Any other >> We'll just condition it on a date
certain. Mr. Chair, sorry about that. >> Hey, you get something? >> Well, Jen, this is the one that uh an order conditions unfulfilled was discovered when the property was sold. >> Possibly. Correct. Yes. >> Yeah. More or less. We kind of
determined a violation. >> That's all. Yeah. All right. Anything else? Any other discussion on this um this one? No. Pretty simple. So, >> yeah. >> Mr. Chair, I'll make a motion to um issue an order of conditions as
discussed. >> Thank you, Cl. Thank you, Ron. We have a motion, a second to issue order orders as discussed. Any other discussion? Hearing none. I will call a roll. Courtney Bird I. >> Steve. >> Patton. >> I. Ron
>> Friscoll I >> Dave >> Pant I >> Bill >> Mc Duffy I >> Jim >> McGrath I >> and Robins is an I. So we're unanimous and to issue order conditions for 71T
ticket path as discussed. All right. Next up is by water realy trust 32 deal ininda place eastmouth mass. Jen, >> yes. This is uh to construct a single family home. Um it was determined that
the intermittent stream did not meet the wershed calculations uh required to consider it a perennial stream. So the river uh the riverfront act is not in
play here. Um, and Alyssa, I have a note. Revised plant. Can't even read my own writing half done. >> Yeah, typically on these projects, we try to see at least 10 ft of trees surveyed into the zone A. So, when they
do clear up to it, we can tell if there's been any encroachment. Um, there were a lot of trees straddling that line. So, um, having those shown will be important. We also need a change of signature from the patella's in the property owner information.
>> Yep. Got it. >> All right. Any other discussion this one? >> Anyone got anything else? All right. I'll entertain a motion to uh issue as discussed. >> Make a motion to issue
orders as discussed. Third second. >> All right. Any other discussion? No. Hearing none. I'm call a roll. Courtney. >> Bird. I >> Patton. >> I. >> Ron. >> I. >> Uh Dave. >> Pant. >> I.
>> Bill. >> Duffy. I >> Jim >> Grath. I >> And um an I. So, it's unanimous to issue a order of conditions as discussed for 32 deal and a place found. All right. Vote amended order of conditions. This
is um 133 Fay Roads. Robert and Natalie Collen. Jen. >> Yes. This was an amended order. Uh they are how do I say this?
Modifying the driveway. um adding additional mitigation. I think that's about it and permitting. And then this in in turn will permit several um other uh additional features such as
like AC units and stepping stones and things like that on the property. >> Okay. All right. Anyone got anything? Am I muted? No, I'm not muted. >> No, you're not muted, >> Ron. Yeah, this is the one that uh I I
proposed that they move the mitigation from uh mitigation A from zone A to the to B. Uh the I talked to the applicant and he was willing to take the chance that if the plants don't survive, then they goes back to plan A. So, this would
help some whatever they neighbor thinks is a water problem, the mitigation in B could possibly help that. And he's willing to take the chance. We just have to change the makeup of the plants a little bit because they'll be they'll be a little wetter and they won't be on the on the the bank
on zone A. Can we condition that? >> If that's what the board would like to do, we can condition it. >> Sounds okay to me. >> Yeah. Did Did Tom show that on the plan?
No, Tom. Tom Tom didn't show it on. He had the mitigation area B, if you want to call it that, was on the plan, but it wasn't um it wasn't it was there because he wanted to put in that other driveway material. >> So now they they're losing what 8 ft of
driveway and re regrassing it >> and um >> Okay, >> so >> discussion guys like that. >> Any issues? >> That's what I'm Well, >> yeah. Well, I it sounds good to me. I'm
just wondering if we need to have Tom change the plan to to to uh to >> We would need a We would need a revised plan. >> That's right. >> So, it would be It makes sense to me the condition, though. >> Yeah. So, let me get this straight. Revised plan moving this top part. So,
>> southwest corner, >> this right corner down to the wet area. And if the plants don't survive due to stress of going from water to drought to water to drought, they relocate them
back up there. >> Yeah. But they'll have to be different plants, right? >> Correct. >> Okay. >> So to Tom's going to have to come up with a plant pallet that is going to work in that area. >> Yeah. >> I I do have one more question. Are we
are we talking are we moving all of the mitigation uh in that location near the water but just part of it? part of it is my understanding correct Ron >> as much as possible >> one spot to another >> I don't like I don't like the statement
as much as possible because the regulations are very clear that the the mitigation needs to be closest to the resource in your zone A because routinely people remove vegetation from your zone B. So, I would be willing to
accept this experiment with the mitigation that was shown on that right upper corner, Ron, and move that down >> the whole thing. >> I'm going to push back if we're going to try to move all of the mitigation down into that. >> Oh, no, no, no. Just the just the one on
the right hand corner. Just that section. And I'm calling it section A in my mind and just moving it back because it's in zone A. >> Okay. >> So, the southwest corner back down. I'm I am just going to say that that's not what your regulations say. And as your administrator, I do have to remind you
that your regulations say that it all has should go into zone A. But if this is something the board would like to do, we can we can try it out. I'm going to have the same concerns like I did with Tom's plan over on Courier about stressing the plants. But let's see if I
can't work with Tom, come up with some sort of plant palette that might work. Um, and then we'll probably have to put a time frame on it like >> I I don't think these people are flipping this house. So, if the plants, you know, don't survive within like 2
years or something, then they need to be relocated. Does that is that acceptable? >> That's very acceptable. >> Yeah. >> And one more historical fact, that's where the garden used to be. When one family owned all three of those homes, they had a full garden down there. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. I I I I'm not quite sure where the water issues coming from. So I I don't know which property is contributing to it. So we'll see what we can do. >> Okay. >> Yeah. But I remember that was Dr. Burwell's property. I remember that
tennis courts and all that stuff that was in there. Yeah. Okay. I'll make a motion to u issue an order discussion order of conditions as abundantly discussed tonight.
>> Driscoll second. >> So we have a motion a second to issue an order of condition an amended order of conditions that as discussed. Um any other discussion?
All right. Hearing none I'm going to call >> real quickly. So, is that monitored? So, someone's going to look at it next year to make sure everything's still alive. >> We can we can add monitoring reports. That means they'll have to, you know, submit like
in this case like a monitoring report a year or two or reports a year. >> See if adding a monitoring report because if we're going to do this experiment, >> we have to know if it works. So >> aren't we aren't we getting monitoring reports on a regular basis from all
these places? >> Not necessarily, Ron. If it's just routine mitigation, we usually don't require the monitoring reports. It's if it's like a full scale restoration or something like that. >> I thought we were as of a few months ago. I thought we were going to require the moni regular monitoring reports for
everything. >> I can start requiring it. I mean, it's right. It's a special condition that I just sometimes take out, but I can do it on all of them. That's fine. >> Yeah. No, I thought we I thought we were doing that. Okay. >> Yeah, I just wanted to make sure that that was in there.
>> Y got it. Report and Ron noted I will start requiring him on all projects. >> All right. >> And I might have just missed that. Sorry. Okay. >> Okay. So, we have a motion in a second. So, I'm going to call a roll. No other
discussion. Right. All right. Cord I >> Steve I >> Ron >> I >> Bill >> Duffy I >> Jim >> McGrath I >> and Robins is an I. So we're unanimous
on this. Um you've issued order conditions for 133 Fay Road. Anything else? Anyone else get anything else for us tonight? >> I'll make a motion to adjurnn. All right. So, we have a motion, a second to
adjurnn. Robins, I >> Duffy, I >> Good job. I think we got it all.