e e e e e e e e people actually watch our hearings so I get people coming up to me and making
comments about something I either said or didn't say which is kind of scary actually they need a life oh I got to do something in my old age [Music]
I was taking a shortcut to the knob through the property you're not supposed to cut through and and the caretaker came out and said oh hi Steve I have no idea who he was and I kept walking down their Trail
that's fine got my eyes on you right all right 7 o'clock you guys ready no recording in progress all right good evening and
welcome to the March 12th meeting of the fouth 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 Betsy's under the weather tonight but we have a quorum so we're moving
forward and as a reminder for excuse me for commenting I'll call on each of you in turn and that all votes have to be done by roll call to our public attendees at any anytime during this meeting you may answer 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'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 public comments will be limited to 3 minutes each regarding rdas we're overwhelmed with
them tonight so hold your horses under a request for determination of applicability the applicant is asking the commission to determine if the provisions of the mass jusus Wetlands protection act Andor the fou Wetlands bylaw apply to their proposed project a
negative determination is that the provisions of the act and or the bylaw do not apply therefore the project May proceed as proposed a positive determination means the provisions of the act and or the bylaw do in fact
apply and or may require some conditions therefore the project would require notice fent application so as an applicant you actually want to hear say something hear us say something negative all right first up vot minutes
February 26 2025 Mr chairman I'd move approval of the minutes as written Patton second we have a motion in multiple seconds to accept the minutes as submitted for February 26 questions or
comments all right we're voting Courtney bird ey Matthews I Kevin O'Brien I Ron RIS I Russ Robins I Steve and I it is unanimous with this Quorum we have
accepted the minutes of February 26 thank you Kristen next up is a request for determination of applicability first up Tim Macky 15 Penzance Road fou mass for permission to remove ornamental
plannings and Hardscape and to install native shrubs and grasses Alyssa staff recommends a negative3 under the state and -2 under the bylaw resourc boundaries are not confirmed bird so move riscal second all right we have a motion and a
second to accept staff's recommendation questions or comments we're voting Courtney bir ey Matthews I Kevin O'Brien I Ron Risco I
Russ Steve Pat I it is unanimous we have accepted staff's recommendation thank you Alysa and Fallon next up our requests for a hearing under a notice of intent all hearings of the F Conservation
Commission are held simultaneously under the authorities of the Massachusetts Wetlands protection act and the fouth wetlands bylaw although a single decision of the commission is issued it represents a separate decision under each Authority as a reminder of 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 bylaw 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 first up Weatherly Doris quet Harbor Boatyard 36 quet Harbor Road Falmouth m
for permission to reconstruct an existing licensed peer Jen yes Mr chairman I am promoting Dave Martin uh to present his project thank
you where are you Dave he's in get off to another nice smooth start Dave's G to mess it all up I am so you hear me now y we can hear you let's start the video when I hit now we got everything running again we can see you
hey so up sir I'll share my screen try to do that this right here share wow look at that can everybody see that all right I'll set yes I'll set so we're here tonight to request your
approval to reconstruct the uh inner half of the stock from this line to the concrete bulkhead the remainder of the pier had been reconstructed some near number of years ago permitted approved and reconstructed um the work would take
place schelz Marine with Ben Carson they'll come in by a barge and do most of the work from the barge remove the piles remove the decking remove the timbering the cross balls and replace
the dock in kind we've shown a debris boom around the work area this is a town owned uh bulkhead and gravel parking area so probably some of that will be used for parking and things of that
nature while the plane is on the screen are there any questions uh we'll poll everyone after you're done with your presentation Dave I'll stop sharing then if you'd like yeah don't be upset if you have to bring
it back up but do my best all right Jen yes Mr chairman I don't believe we have many um comments um Alysa had requested that um Dave should a boom on a plan and
Dave you submitted a Revis plan with that correct I did this afternoon perfect um we have a d number so we're fine we double checked on that and obviously DMF comments will be incorporated they want the piles removed in their entirety and not just cut below
the mudline that's all Mr chairman all right Alissa nothing at this time thank you all right commissioner comments or questions Courtney pretty straightforward no questions it is straightforward isn't it
yeah Kevin no questions Mr chairman thank you all right Ron no questions it is straightforward thank you all right Ross Steve well said Thank
You righty Jen is there anything in the public chat function please nothing in the public chat Mr chairman Mr chairman I'll make a motion to close the hearing and take it under advisement disco second Dave you may get set the record for the
most expedient yes application all right we have a motion in a second to close the hearing all right Jen I asked you about public comments correct yes you did Mr chairman thank you all right we have a motion a second to close the hearing
last call questions or comments all right hearing number voting to close the hearing Courtney uh bird ey Matthews ey Kevin O'Brien I Ron Drisco ey Russ Robin ey Steve I it is unanimous we have
closed this hearing thank you Dave thank you all have a good evening good night Dave good night good work Dave it's all right next up Boyce cson
I don't know if this is Acme or Acme f with mass LLC 278 scanton Avenue f with mass for permission to conduct maintenance and Improvement dredging Jen yes Mr chairman
um R there we go we will unfortunately this was the one that Rubble wanted us to take out of uh to skip until his amended but I do not see his colleague Jake who's prepared for
zero Central so I would suggest taking opening this hearing and then Mr chairman will take the amended out of order before we go on to Central so I am promoting uh rul lizardi from cap and Islands engineering to
present his notice so since Jen just ruined the surprise for you there is it a amended order coming up later in the in the agenda so we're going to shake things up a bit see who's sleeping um just so you
have so that you have the whole for the record we still on 278 screen sorry I really didn't mean to interrupt everybody that's talking over me I'm sorry never mind Jen yes Kevin we are at 278 scr
half Mr Lazard you're up sir good evening for the record RI Sardi from cap and Islands engineering representing the applicant and I think it's amme fouth ma LLC um the applicant and property owner
um of this for this project um Chen if if possible and you can um recognize either Boyce camson or Tim Kohan from I see a Tim Cohan if you could promote him I believe Bob Ammon is in attendance as
well oh Bob amond okay got it I got Bob I got you Bob and Tim Cohen okay thank you so I will start with sharing my screen with your permission
yes sir so this project is is for a notice of intent to permit um maintenance and Improvement dredging at 278 Scranton na this is the site of fouth marine um
using the fouth gis or um toppo Maps here is inner Farm inner um Harbor and this property is towards the bottom half of the harbor at this location looking at an
this is what the harbor looks like um the property lines for this project are through here and over here so this is the area that we are proposing to do dredging for so we file this um this plan for the
application and on the plan you see a rainbow colored um kind of area in front of the bulkheads and this is depicting water depths um the red areas towards the bottom side represents depths of
greater than 10 feet the yellows are depths of 9 feet um the greens are 7 to eight feet and this area over here is less than S feet what the applicant wants to do is get depths of seven feet
throughout the the marina so we file um a sub another um plan um along with the main site plan which is this one that I'm showing now now this plan was shown was produced to
show the licenses in the past um starting in the 1940s um to the 1970s all the different um permits that allow dredging within the same areas um even though we call
that this area to the South is what we consider Improvement dredging we believe all of this um Harbor has been dredged in the past however we can't find a particular license that shows that this area was dredged to Elevation minus 7
this area was dressed to Elevation minus 8 in the past this area was dressed to minus 8.7 and this area was dressed to minus 8.7 and again we're just looking to recapture those depths to Elevation minus 7 which is the cross hatch in
green that we show in this area so that's the project I do I did receive um the comments from DMF um we have no objection to the time of years restriction we do propose a siltation
curtain um on the site throughout um the whole project this project as we will explain later on um is in tandem with the whole Marina reconstruction um and it's going to take place simultaneously this area of dredging to
the South is the Dred that this board approved for Nas Marina um last year um we do have if I go back to the site plan we have a couple of salt marches on NAS
Marina's property and we propose that the edge of the dredge is going to be 25 feet from from those Sal Marsh um we do see that one of the recommendations from DMF is to also show 25 ft from mean low
water we asked this board not to allow for that as a condition because that will prevent some of the uses that the applicant wants to do for the peers at this location so we do have approximately 15 to 10 feet um setback
from me low water and comparing it to the prior permit for Nas Marina in this location which was allowed to dredge all the way up to mean low water um and in similar way last year the project that
was a dredge for across this Harbor um at this location for McDougall we're actually allowed to dredge all the way up to mean high water um but for that reason we were asking this board to allow us to dredge to within 101 15 feet
of mean low water and not adopt the 25 foot um recommendation from DMF from me low water we do meet the 25 foot offset to mean l to the Sal Marsh that DMF is recommending um I'll stop sharing but I
will continue with some um addressing some of the comments from staff so there is some sections in the local conservation regulation um 10255 and the state WPA
10253 and what it is that the design of the dredging for improvement um has to meet certain criteria and not be in a sense detrimental to the environment um not changing the Topography of the of
the harbor not changing um erosion um or sedimentation to beaches down down Coast beaches and things like that um so this project is proposed to be at 4 to1 slopes to reach that elevation of minus 7 which is it's just elevation that has
been um dredged at this site before this work is not going to be changing the um the overall wave action that happens in the Inner Harbor is not going to be affecting or increasing flooding on the abiding property or anywhere else in this Harbor and it's not going to change
temperatures or flushing and turbidity within the harbor so we believe this project does meet those regulations of um 10253 um from the state and 10255 um from the local
Bas um overall there is roughly 16,200 sare ft of land under the ocean that is proposed to be dredged with this dredg 850 cubic yard is proposed to be trucked away we're not keeping anything on site we don't have the room to to bury this
material so it is being trucked away of that 825 or 850 cubic yards about 540 is within areas that is called maintenance dredging and about 310 is Improvement dredging with that if there's any
questions um we'll be happy to answer thank you R Bob do you have anything to add at this point not at this point thank you all right Tim do you have anything to add at this point no thank you um we just went
through a very similar project at McDougal which R mentioned um it was successful we utilized Schultz Marine as our marine contractor and uh and caping Islands was involved in that project as well this is slightly larger but very similar in scope and uh please let us
know if you have any questions thank you excellent Jen yes Mr chairman um thank the board will have to deliberate on the requests to um be um no closer than that 25 ft is
recommended by DMF other than that we have no no questions the Improvement dredging is a small part of this project and and I don't have any concerns with it at this time okay Alissa no questions
thank you all right just to clarify the the 25 foot variance is is to mean low water not the salt marsh is that correct I believe so right Ro where is the salt marsh in there correct um so
DMF recommends two different 25 foot set one to the salt marsh and one to me low water we comply with the 25t to the marsh what we're asking the board is not to um condition to the me low water got it thank you but I we should point out
that we will be I think it was 10 to 15 ft from the u mean low water so we're not proposing to be that close to it thank you
Kevin no questions this time Mr chairman thank you on yeah I had a question on dewatering there's uh I know most of it's going to be done on land and some is going to be done from a barge on the the harbor how are you going to dewat it in the barge is that going to be moved somehow onto
land or is it de water right on the barge and then put put back in the harbor so we have two options so the The Dredge barge C do weding a certain amount of of the material on the barge and then um transfer it over to the
trucks on land but there's also a the watering basing proposed on land um between the building and the bulit um and some of that material is going to be done um it's going to be de water from that um the watering Basin on land and
then um loaded into trucks and trucked away to final disposal okay I understand that but how are you going to get the the material from the barge to the land is is it so it's a clam
um bucket and it grabs the the material and it places it either on the the basing on the barge or on land all right but the material in the barge how does that get on land how does that get disposal after see water the same the same crane that runs the same
right the same crane is the one that moves it from one place to the other all right so it has a reach yes okay how did May I should ask that in the first place okay thank you all right
Russ no questions Mr shair all right Steve no questions thank you all right Courtney where are the dredge spoils going um we have yet to deide the final
location um we're sampling um the sediments to do the quality all the testing that's needed for the water quality search um once we get that we'll find out exactly what we're GNA Go I mean because the odds are they've got
some contamination in them that's right so depending on the results um there are certain sites that accept um the disposal so we'll have to figure that one out okay no other questions thank
you Jen is there anything in the public chat function please nothing in the public chat all right you said we have a d number we do I'll make a motion to I have one more
comment sure uh thanks one of the DMF uh comments the last one is about the potential for fuel spills um on the Upland and it there are two sent which are somewhat uh contradictory and I just
think that the language when it's written up ought to be cleaned up one sentence says that um all landbase equipment should be prohibited from being refueled on site and the next sentence says if equipment is refueled
on site adequate containment uh method should be uh utilized so one says don't do it the other says says how to do it um and so I just would recommend that uh that that language be uh made a little
clearer and um I don't know whether any of the equipment such as that crane will need to be refueled on site but I think that's probably likely um and therefore I think the second sentence should should apply and we shouldn't be in violation of the previous
sentence are you you I'm sorry um so David if I understand you or Bob if I understand you correctly um you would include both pieces of information in
the condition no no he's he's saying to pick the ladder yeah I'm sorry he's saying to allow allow fueling but with safety measures yeah so you incorporate both
okay thank you yeah so I'll make a motion to close the hearing and take it under advisement CH second all right we have a motion in a second to close the hearing last call questions or comments we're voting to close this
hearing Courtney bir I Matthews I Kevin O'Brien I Ron Risco I Russ Robins ey Steve I it is unanimous we have closed this
hearing now Den this is where we're going to move something around right correct Mr chairman so the next one so we're going to skip around a little bit for this one item so pay attention here
we're going to jump to request to amend an existing order of conditions and it's for the same property so we're trying to do it so that while it's all freshen your minds because this is such a long meeting so I'm going to read the legal
pleas which is voice camson Acme fouth Mass LLC 278 Scranton Avenue fouth Mass request to amend the order of conditions for Mass de number 25- 4779 to reconfigure the layout of the
previously approved Marina so just to be clear this is a uh an existing order of conditions that we're talking about so or do you want R to start well
R's still with us from cap and Islands engineering to present his separate project on this property this evening and I'm assuming Bob and Tim are going to remain good evening for the record RI Sardi with K engineering representing
the applicant um a fth ma LLC with us also is team Kohan from Acme and Bob Ammon representatives for the applicant um I could reshare my screen yes sir so as the Sheran mentioned this is
to amend an existing order of condition 25 4779 um in the past we filed um an application to reconfigure the marina uh and it included several components of the marina um but this amendment is just
to um revise the actual footprint of the floating peers um we have a fixed Pier at this location too actually which is a travel lift those two fixed peers are not proposed to be um revised um all the
other floating peers and a couple of fixed peers which um the permit currently has this one as a fixed pier and this portion is a fixed Pier um those fixed portions are not proposed any longer um what the applicant wants
to do is like I mentioned keep these two fixed peers for the TR travel lift but then all the other peers are going to be floating peers in this configuration the half to the north it's kind of similar to what was um approved
before um it's a main Pier with fingers peers coming off of them um to the very north side which is the ferry Pier um that one is moved slightly closer to the property line at this location and then the south onethird of the marina the
floating piers is completely different we have this combination of like a inverted e shape and C um floating Pier system that is completely different than was proposed and approved before
compared to existing condition this Marina still reduces the overall footprint of total peers by approximately 276 square feet it also reduces the number of piles and the footprint of these piles um on land
under the ocean of approximately 151 Square fet so we believe it is a great improvement over what's currently existing and it will um be easier and better for the applicant to operate the marina um and in this
layout you can see actually better why we're asking for the dredging in the prior application for this um this floating piers at this south location so we need the actual deps at this location um just to connect one project or one
application with the other um so that's the the amendment that we're asking for and there's any questions we'll try to answer all right thank you Chen yes Mr chairman um usually the
board when looking at marinas takes the marina the footprint of the marina and has allowed in um other cases for the peers to be reconfigured um so I believe this is
kind of with within what the board has permitted before when it comes to uh Marina expansions um both in Falmouth Inner Harbor and elsewhere in town so um I have no comments or concerns thank you
Alissa no comments thank you so we kind of need to approve the dredging for this configuration to work I see what you did R I got your number all right commissioner comments exactly all
said thank you we can't hear you Jamie your microphone's gone bad yeah I don't know what happened all right there you are I don't know I wasn't I don't know what I did Russ comments or
questions I'm good Mr chairman Steve nice presentation r no questions thank you Courtney um I presume the Harbor Master is fine with
this um so we fil with the Harbor Master um I have not seen a new letter I do know that he did Issue a letter in 2022 for the original order of conditions um and he had no objections but I haven't seen a new one for this
application yeah I mean I I mean clearly you're gonna need to if he's on board with it I'm fine with it I you know that's my only concern no question yeah like like Jen mentioned it is within the the zone of reconfiguration that was
approved um last time um so that was reviewed the same as before yeah I mean we we can always condition the the the order to make sure that that letter is in the file that's
all no other questions all right Kevin no questions Mr chairman thank you all right Jen is there anything in the public chat function please nothing in the public chat Mr chairman all right right anything else
from the applicant side all right what are you thinking folks I'll make a motion to close the hearing and take it under advisement risal second all right we have a motion of second to close the hearing last call questions or
comments we're voting to close the hearing Courtney thir I Matthew I Kevin O'Brian I Ron fisc I Russ Robins ey Steve p i it is unanimous we have closed
this hearing thank you rul thank you Bob thank you Tim thank you thank you Bob Tim all right we're going back to our previously written agenda next up our continued requests for hearing under a notice of intent
first up Ronaldo andreid Zer Central Avenue map and parcel ID is 32- 04- 004 d002 fou mass for permission to construct a single family dwelling and
install a Title 5 sewage Disposal system on an undeveloped lot and before anybody starts I have a question Jen this map and parcel ID that for the entire division that has not been
divided yet it has not been divided right so this doesn't identify the individual property oh boy all right Jen yes Mr chairman I have promoted Jake frick from cap and Allens engineering to
present his project Jake you with us I am I am here there he is you're up Sir all right uh good evening my my name is Jake fricky I'm professional L surveyor with cin Islands engineering
representing Ronaldo Andre for the project on Central Avenue we filed a notice of intent application D number 25-55 to reconstruct or to construct a dwelling on the property and with your permission I would like to share my
screen yes sir this is as you stated a continuation of the hearing on February 26 um board comments at that hearing focused uh primarily on the restoration planting being partially on a separate
proposed lot and the recommendation for a IIA septic system revised plan was submitted to conservation last week addressing some CL the client uh comments and some client modific apption as well this plan
includes the IIA system a row of privacy screening along the property line in this area and uh the house was modified to include a uh slightly larger deck and a
Pool and Patio per client request after lengthy discussions with the client about his plan for this parcel it be claimed clear to us that he was unsure of exactly how he wanted to proceed with the subdivision and based on this the subdivision work on our end
has been completely put on hold as the client wants to focus his resources and efforts on the house project in light of that we are not showing the proposed property lines as we were before and recommend that the restoration be planting be installed concurrently with
the installation of the limit of work to eliminate any question about the timing of when the plants will be installed based on questions that came up in a zoom meeting with conservation staff on Wednesday 35 we Stak the revised design
in the field and scheduled a site visit the following Monday 310 to review the design and the site conditions we had a lengthy discussion at the site on Monday with staff which reiterated uh staff comments which was
reiterated in staff comments provided yesterday uh following that discussion with conservation on site we made some revisions to the plan which is the plan that I'm presenting here tonight a copy of this plan was sent to staff earlier
today the differences between the plan submitted on Wednesday and the plan submitted today are as follows the deck running along the easterly side of the property here has been redesigned as requested and replaced by
two sets of steps coming off of the house at the closest point these steps are 13t from the limit of work and 14 ft from the fwr a Zone one of the dry Wells has been increased in capacity uh and
moved in such a way so that it can also double as a pool draw down and the drainage system in the driveway has been assessed and moved into the driveway for ease of installation and we can confirm that it is designed
to handle a 25e storm at this point I will stop sharing my screen and be happy to answer any questions thanks Jake chair okay
Jake um yes we did ask for some revisions on the plan but the board has not seen this plan and we got this plan at 1:30 this afternoon so we have not looked at it um yes it does appear that you have Incorporated some design changes that I suggested and I
appreciate that but in the future I'm not and will not accept a plan the day of a hearing to be presented to this board at the hearing that it's unfair to the board because they haven't seen it um I I do appreciate you making those
design changes um but it's really kind of hard for us to review something the day of a hearing and not have the Board review it as well um so with that Mr chairman I I mean my comments and questions I'm going to still have the
same um I I don't know how you want to proceed if you want to proceed I can comment on what I can um but this will need a continuance so we can review the plan [Music] um yeah it's tough for us to comment and
question something we haven't seen Courtney wait your turn so I mean I can comment on um the driveway portion um so Jake did revise the plan based on comments that we had in the field they restak they had
enlarged the deck and put the pool in and we really did have concerns about basically almost shoehorning this house into that small space cuz there were several large trees um along the limit of work within
your no disturbance Zone a to the salt marsh that would have to be either removed or altered um for the construction of this house um Jake I again I don't even have a hard copy of
the new plan so um how far is the closest point from the house to that limit of work that no disturbance Zone a it's it's 13 feet from these from these steps here uh I don't I don't know what steps
you're talking about I don't have a plan uh can you see my screen oh no no uh would you like me to share it again yes please all right can you see my screen yes sir all right so it's uh this this
set of steps here coming off of the house is the closest point to the limit of work and it's 13 ft there to the limit of work and it's 14et to the azone line which is just beyond the limit of work line
okay um again J okay you can stop sharing Jake again I appreciate you making the the the revisions and it does look like what we discussed in the field but I'm going to give you a pass on this one Jake but don't ever ever do that again
um because you're going to need the continuance anyway because we just haven't we have we staff has to do our due diligence and the board does need to see the hard copy um that said the board also needs to determine whether or not you're going to allow a construction of
a driveway up and over that Coastal Bank um the only time I've seen the board do something uh per permit something similar has been when there has been an existing house or
um some sort of structure so although there is a path that they are proposing to revegetate that path we can't find any permitting history on the path um so the board will need to determine um whether or not you were going to allow
the driveway up and over that Coastal Bank this is a fairly large property obviously there was some um proposal to obviously you know there's some thought into possibly subdividing
the property so there is you know room to pull that house off um from way down on deep into that property and pull it further into more the middle of the property to avoid construction of the driveway on the Coastal Bank um but
that's all I can do right now Mr chairman without seeing a revised plan and re revised staking in the field okay alosa thank you uh just one follow-up comment um if the commission did share
in the staff's concerns regarding um some of the larger trees located just inside the Zone a past the limit of work um something we have required in the past is maybe the first 10 feet into the Zone a actually surveying the um mature
trees in the area just so we have a record of them on paper it's something that helps the staff when compliance comes along um in assuring that those are still present on the property if the commission was interested in having something like that uh with a continuance that could be added to the
plan thank you all right warney before your hand falls off I just um I think as in my role as resident perin I think we should
continue this for a week or so to allow staff to ruminate on the what's been put in front of us and then we can properly deal with it yeah all right does anybody else have
any comments or questions um Ron yeah just um what are their options on that driveway going over the Coastal Bank is it allowed or not allowed or is there some sort of engineering that can be done you know I think can you put a
driveway can you put up an a and a bridge in can you go over the bank can you go over going to be up to the board Ron it is an actual Coastal Bank it's an actual resource area I don't I I have seen reconstructions of
driveways um but again that's to access a house that was existing the other option is to relocate the proposed house this is a how many acre property there is plenty of room
the street yeah on on the other side of the Coastal Bank to locate a house if the house does not have to be down this far absolutely understood I'm just curious you know again I've been here a year but I haven't seen this one before and um
again we put we put peers we put ramps over the salt marsh as to get to a pier I don't know if this is any different to do it here just thinking that's all mhm oh there you go thinking again yeah I mean it's rare that we we'd allow something
like that um this is a case where you know they have the land to do it yeah and you know I know they're trying to subdivide the property into I think it was four Lots but maybe it can only be three and at the risk of sounding like undesigning their their project you know
maybe the the Lots three and four or the last two get merged and but that's not for us U we really need to see the revised plan to you know to really make an educated decision you
know um any other comments or questions all right Courtney don't be repetitive what you got um no I think if we're looking at something like this obviously the question is uh can we as a
board um make a finding that is unique to this situation to allow it's just that when we do that do we open a door to a lot of dangerous precedents having been on this board for a number of years um sometimes when we make these uh
evaluations based on psych conditions they come back back to bite us later on when somebody else finds another situation and they point to this so you know I think we have to be very careful about how we do proceed which is all
more reason why we need a continu to kind of work through these things how long have you been on the board huh how long have you been on the board uh since about 203 20 years over
20 you're almost ready for retirement yeah I know all right so you and I both Jamie you know you have to look at a property under its own merits and you're right we have to be careful of setting a precedent so it's something we have to
think about as a board and see what we would allow or not you know It's just tough when you know when when when you have this much acreage it's tough to be sympathetic to the location you know I mean I'm just speaking for myself so
yeah all right so Jake do you have a request for us yes I request continuance um I I would like it to be next week but I I don't think that you guys are actually meeting next week no
we're not meeting next week Jake in the 26 if I put anything else on the 26th the chairman will probably call for my head so you're looking at April 2nd sorry whoa all right well I guess it is
what it is yeah I'm sorry Jake I just I I know you Incorporated the the comments we made on the field I really appreciate that but these guys needs to see the plan as well sorry all right such is life yeah yeah but thank you for making
those revisions and we'll look at them carefully next week so yeah April 2nd's the best I can do for you Jake sorry okay well I guess we'll take April 2nd then thank you at the request of the applicant I move that we continue this hearing until April the
2 phisal second April the 6 second April two yeah day after day after the fools day oh right we have we have a motion in a second to continue this till April 2nd last call I'm sorry I skipped the step Jen is there anything in the
public chat function nothing in the public chat Mr chairman sorry about that all right we have a motion in a second to continue this still April 2nd last call questions or comments we're voting on the continuance Courtney ver ey Matthew's I
Kevin O'Brien I Ron chis I Russ Robin I Steve I it is unanimous we have continued this until April 2nd thank you Jake you're welcome thank you have a nice evening guys next up a request to amend an
existing order of conditions town of first up town of fou various waterways and beaches that's sufficiently vague Bou Mass request to amend the order of conditions for Mass to EP number 25-
4717 to add an improvement dredging site alter three channels and recategorize a nourishment site and a dewatering site wow that was a multiple
Jen yes Mr chairman I have promoted Leslie fields from the woods Hull group group up to present the project as well as Greg Frasier the town's director of marine and environmental services and the town's Harbor
Master excellent good evening Leslie are you starting or is Greg starting I'm happy to start unless Greg you want to give a preface to this all right I'll start um I'm going to share my screen if that's all right
Mr chairman can you hear me now oh yes we can oh okay yep it's fixed now so go ahead Leslie and I'll answer any questions okay all right all right are you guys looking at my
presentation no we're looking at no screen screen saver okay a nice one here we are how about this this good yes better yes all right so this is a
request oh wait a minute okay wait a minute now what do you say Amendment overview overview I like that jump to the important stuff all right wait a minute I'm just
going to stop start over I'm sorry all right is this full screen it's close enough close enough let all right request to amend an order of conditions um just an overview the Conservation Commission issued an order of conditions uh SC
25477 back in 2022 for dredging of beach nourishment at various waterways throughout the town we want to amend that order of conditions um by adding Manet Beach as a temporary dewatering area for use um while dredging meansa
entrance Channel which is totally in the town of Bourne and for which we already have an order of conditions we also want to deepen the uh Great Pond outer Channel narrow the Great Pond inner Channel and then deepen the Great Pond outer Channel um so man I'm just going to go
through each one of them each side so Manet Beach temporary dewatering Basin we're adding um about a 12,000 foot temporary dewatering Basin at be at beach as I said for Sandy material only dredged from the Ganson Harbor approach channel so we had three borings out
there we know that that material is all sandy um that channel was approved by the born Conservation Commission um I don't know a couple of months ago so we're good on that front and we just want this temporary dewatering Basin to pump the material into once it's Dew
watered it'll be trucked off site to um probably the town's either another Beach that has permits or the town's composting facility where it be stored there until it's needed for a beach and um then the site will be restored
uh okay so um you guys looking at the plan right now Manet Beach dewatering plan yes okay so here's a picture of the dewatering base and here's the parking lot over here the um bulkhead and here's the Judy that goes
out here so it takes up most of the beach but it's still above the high tide line um here's a cross section of it uh as far as the dewatering goes we could either just let it sort of build up a burm you know excavate this hole
build up a BM right here to um hold the water hold the slurry and then it let it sort of drain out over the beach naturally um or we could also put in a pipe to allow some of that water to drain after it's been dewatered and that'll be sort of a game decision you know at the time we do the work and we'll work with the Barnesville County
dreds to make that decision green Great Pond outer and inner we're going to deepen Great Pond outer channel to minus 9 at mean low water um with one additional foot of allowable overd depth dredging and then we're also reducing the reducing the width of the inner
channel to 50 feet um so we're reducing impacts at the inner Channel by 55,000 some OD square feet the reason we're doing this is because frequently the town has to request incursions into the um time of year restriction for marine
fisheries um and we have been asked by DMF to try to go deeper in the hopes that it will reduce the frequency of Maintenance dring so if we don't have to come back as often maybe it's every other year every third year then that's fewer requests to um dredge during the
time of year restriction for marine fisheries so this is the outer Channel we're doing at at Great Pond the inner channels on the north side of the road that's this right here reducing that again uh from about 50 or 60 ft wide to only 50 ft
wide and that's just that's it was determined that that's all all that we need in that area to maintain safe navigation here's the cross sections again so um we're going down to minus-9 with one foot of over depth dredging in the outer
Channel this material here is pumped over to the end Seasons Resort Beach which is also a part over here on yeah over here to the west of the channel um and that's that's already been permitted Green Pond we're just
deepening the outer part of the channel from minus8 or to minus 8 at mean low water with one foot of allowable overd stretching for the same reason want to reduce the frequency of um maintenance stretching so it's just this part right
here the outer Channel again um you know going one foot deeper than what we have now so down to minus 8 with one foot of overd depth no changes to the inner part of the channel here this just a cross-section showing the The Dredge depths minus 8 um down to
minus 99 with over depth that's the cross-section of the this material gets taken to Aces get get on the west west side of the entrance and then we just listed here the resource area so land under the ocean Coastal Beach for the nourishment
sites land Hing shellfish land under fish runs estimated habitats Sur rare Wildlife that's only the two inner channels so great and green pond inner channels we do have a number of Tom of year restrictions where were you know at this point proposing to adhere to all
those although it is it is common for great and green pond for the town to request incursions into that time of year for winter flounder which starts January 15th and ends August 31st I think that's it for the presentation I apologize that I wasn't in full screen
mode um but I'm going to end the slid so and I'll um open to questions thanks leslee Jen thanks Les I'll start with the easy one why my background
um how with these deepen channels I don't have any concerns with them but how much time is that going to buy us do you think is it going to be every other year that we go in now or it every two years do we have any idea I don't think
we really have a we can't give you a really good answer on that but the Hope was it would be every other year because right now basically dredging them almost every year every year yep I'm well aware of that okay and back to manit um for the board there was a uh prohibition of
using meanit um in the original comp dredge permit um there was concerned by the of the neighbors um that meance it just it it it's stable it doesn't need sand um this is just to dewater the Sandy
material and we need to stress that it it can only be Sandy material only no silty material to be dewatered on the beach um that said Leslie the use of the pipe umary would that cause any sort of you
know localized scouring um where the pipe is is is placed towards probably towards closer toward the the the water line yeah no I mean it would be deeper than that so it wouldn't cause any scouring be you know exit
below the below the water line I I honestly don't think that the county dredge would choose that method okay so but but we wanted to include it because it is a little bit more sort of intrusive and if they did choose to do that we wanted everyone to know about it um it would it would exit the water down
below the water line and so there wouldn't be any sort of scour okay so we could probably just condition it to if they are to use that method to let us know and we meet out there with the county drudge and see what their operation is I think that's a really
good yeah that'd be a great condition to add okay perfect that's all I have Mr chairman all right Alysa no comments thank you all right Commission comments and questions Russ we're going to start with
you I've got nothing Mr chairman thank you Steve uh no comments Mr chairman thank you all right Courtney no questions okay I think it's good revision to the project Kevin no
questions Mr chairman thank you Ron I'm all said Thank you Mr chairman all right Mr Frasier I didn't mean to ignore you you have anything you'd like to add at this point uh no just that we're very hopeful that uh that the DMF recommendations of digging deeper will
result in less dredging because as uh Jennifer knows we just today got the this year's time of year waiver to allow dredging to proceed in Great Pond and green pond it's an annual event for us so we're hoping we don't have to do that in the
future let's hope all right Jen is there anything in the public chat function please nothing in the public chat Mr chairman all right I'll make a motion to close the hearing and take it under advis FAL
second all right we have a motion in a second to close the hearing last call questions or comments we're voting to close the hearing Courtney I Matthew's I Kevin
O'Brien i r i Russ Robins ey Steve it is unanimous we have closed this hearing thank you Leslie thank you m good night everyone night Les
night Greg can you stick uh can you Greg can you stick around just in case the board has any questions on that extension request sure thank you all right all right next up uh the next one we had already closed because
we took that out of order to make sure everybody was paying attention and you all passed thank you next up request to extend an existing order of conditions first up town of fth Greg Frasier it's a Greg Frasier night H Master zero town
landing road map is 32-21 d015 z00 to with mass d number 25- 4432 requesting a threeyear extension Jen yes Mr chairman uh the staff is
recommending a three-year extension this is the boat ramp over at CIT correct Greg and um horley and Whitten is currently working on drainage improvements to that parking area which is great but that might affect the boat
rent design um so we need to wait for horing went went to finish um permitting their drainage cuz we may or may not have to amend the boat ramp project so this is the boat ramp that board saw a
few years ago um for the sea pit river boat ramp um so we are recommending a three-year extension on this one okay questions or comments all right what are you thinking I'll move to Grant a three-year
extension fcal second all right we have a motion and a second on the table to Grant to take staff's recommendation of granting a threeyear extension all right we're voting on the extension Courtney bir ey Matthews I
Kevin O'Brien I Ron Risco I Russ Robin I Steve p and I it is unanimous we have granted a threeyear extension thank you thank you good night good
night all right next up Robert Jay and Natalie colan 133 Fay Road fou Mass D number 25- 4528 requesting a one-year extension Jen yes Mr chairman we are recommending a one-year
extension all right questions or comments yeah what what why do they need it they're still finishing up the project Court plantings and all that stuff yeah okay I'll make a motion to extend to one
you um Grant a one-year extension riscal second all right we have a motion and a second to accept staff's recommendation of a one-ear extension we're voting on the extension Courtney bird I Matthews Z Kevin O'Brien
I Ron RIS Russ Robin I Steve Pat I it is unanimous we have granted a one-year extension thank you all right next up continued hearings under an enforcement order I'm going to
read off the next the the first one and the second one because we're going to hear them simultaneously everybody clear on that yep first up Patrick Burke trustee Church Street trust 158 Church Street
pouth Mass unpermitted removal of vegetation within the buffer to a Coastal Bank and John Cook trustee John C cook 2009 trust 170 Church Street Falmouth Mass unpermitted removal of
vegetation within the buffer to a Coastal Bank Jen yes Mr chairman I have promoted both Property Owners John Cook and Patrick Burke as well as John siners from uh Francisco Tavarez
to address the Enforcement issue which Alyssa can brief the board on excellent ala thank you yes so the enforcement before you um was reported to staff in the form of a complaint someone had
driven by noticed that um a lot of vegetation right off of Church Street had been um other mode or just cut very very short um staff was able to send out some letters to the home owners and AR rrange a site visit to confirm um staff
did receive a plan from maral engineering which I have shared with the board previously showing the extent of the clearing and a solid portion of it does fall within your uh jurisdiction both the A and B buffer to the Coastal
Bank um along the water um John here will be working with the homeowners to develop a restoration plan and restore um um what has been removed there are some invasives making their way into the
area so the staff would recommend that the invasives at least within jurisdiction are treated eradicated to the extent we usually see prior to replanting taking place uh in review of aerial photos staff did find a second
violation at 158 just as a note to the board you will see that as an upcoming RDA on a future hearing to replant what has been remed moved on that site and that's all I have all
right seems pretty cut and dry um let's see do the homeowners or Mr Sur do want to comment at this point good evening yes we would for the record my name is Jonathan
C with Francisco tars um I'll be helping with the two homeowners here trying to rectify the problem um as mentioned this was an accident basically performed by an uneducated Landscape Company who
continued to mow into this area um we did meet on site and we spoke of some different remedies that we came up with uh what our clients would like to try and do is just to allow it to grow back as it was um as Alyssa pointed out it is
actually all invasives and our concern is trying to fight the invasives and replant it with new plant material is just going to fail um there's areas that were not cleared that are still there that are still covered within the Grapevine and we feel
that's just going to continue to want to take over I've been monitoring the area through the last few rainstorms there's been no wash out um as the root mass is all still there the company that did this work had brush mode everything down
um the larger area is the the B Zone there is uh one property that has a larger a Zone uh that has been cleared we're basically proposing either netting seeding trying to stop any additional
erosion potentially a limit of work fence and maybe allowing the enforcement order to stay open if we didn't see uh proper growth coming back of these areas and then proceeding forward with an enforcement order the clients did not
gain anything from this other than actually a loss of their privacy both their property sit much higher up and you know this was to be a cleaning of the area down bottom not into the The Zone but the landscaper continued to go and clear too much so what we're trying
to propose is allowing this material to come back maybe installing some some delineation marks of these zones um I feel if we're going in there to try and eradicate all the invasives it's going to turn into a very large
potential erosion condition um like chenet pointed out right on the the the road Edge there so with the mass that's been there and the lack of erosion that we've seen through these rainstorms I feel that it growing back would probably be our best uh our best form going
forward I don't know if the homeowners or Jonathan the uh pepone the lawyer if he's also in the room has anything else they want to add okay I'm going to promote Jonathan palone I did not realize jonath was here
as well for this project hello Jonathan good evening hi um yes Jen I have not had a chance to speak with you about this um I've had some preliminary
conversations with the property owners I don't think I have too much to add to what uh Jonathan cill has presented tonight I think he appropriately captures the owner's feelings this was a mistake um but I
think that in terms of restoring things to the original conditions um it it does seem like there are some some benefits that would acre to allowing things to regrow um but I'm sure that the commission has some strong feelings
about that I think at the least um there might need to be a better understanding of what's actually there right now what root structures are in place right now because I think really the the question that comes to my mind is what is the right method to address
in this area and uh it does seem pretty extreme to go in and Grub everything out and try and replant everything um which is certainly not the original conditions that were there is that all Jonathan yes okay all right Alysa did I ask you I'm
sorry um I don't have any initial comments at this time okay all right commissioner comments for the record I'm recusing personally Mr chairman can I offer one comment since I
haven't sure I don't recommend you allowing it to regrow this was a violation if you were to go down this road talk about a can of worms should be opening up we'd have people mowing down invasives all over the place and saying
oh I'll just let it grow back um the board has never just allowed the invasiv to grow back it was you know is a violation I would recommend that at the very least the Zone a how far does the
Zone a go on Alyssa uh I don't have the plan in front of me it was on the electronic so we would need to look at Tim's plan a hard copy of the plan at you know at least the Zone a at the very least um there
are methods to protect those new plantings from invasives we see it all the time time with either root barriers and or Mo strips so we see mitigation and restoration plantings right up to neighboring properties that are a sea of
invasives and somehow those plantings manage so um I would caution the board to just uh just allowing it to grow back that's all make one
comment sure this is Jonathan palone again the one thing that I wanted to point out here because I know that there's several other projects that have been improved in this area around Church Street um but this particular property these two
properties rather are um I think much more impacted by wind and the other impacts onto this Coastal area I mean you can see when you drive by that everything is really blown over and I think that's where some of the concerns about how you're going to restore this
area um under these particularly harsh conditions around the corner there's been a fair amount of clearing of vegetation underneath other cover other um Juniper type trees and further around
there's rather large oak trees uh grass has been planted underneath those in those areas but those are all in the Lee they're much more protected zones and and on this side there there's to me it seems there's a pretty good reason why this whole area has been predominantly
invasive um I think if you want us to kind of sit down again I haven't had a chance to talk with Jen about this project yet um and and we can try and figure out some good areas to put things in I myself would like to see more documentation about what plants are
actually there um because if it is predominantly invasive species that have been cut I certainly understand your concerns about precedent but in terms of the regulations restoring to the regional conditions we need to be mindful of what are we trying to correct
and how are we going to do that in the most appropriate way so that we're not causing more problems than we're trying to solve so I think that the property owners certainly want to uh make things right and that that and acknowledge that this was um a mistake
that obviously they own the property so they control that regardless of how it came about um but let's try and figure out an appropriate remedy for this that actually solves the problem um one comment to that 158 went
through a major uh major mitigation and restoration project um several years ago those plants survived so it's not that much of a wind tunnel that things can't
grow that that's all I have right again I I think that even for that area it's not as jutting out as this particular area is but it is the conservation commission's assessment of that
I okay all right Mr Burke I see you have your hand raised could you turn on your audio and video please um go ahead am I no Burke I'm sorry hi Pat Burke uh land owner 158 Church
Street uh Jen I think you make a good point I just wanted to uh point out or clarify and John can back me up on this that we have had uh very little luck uh growing down in that area uh outside of
those zones when we've tried to plant Evergreens around the uh electrical boxes and whatever they are Transformers uh we're probably in our third round of Evergreens we've also anything above the tree line suffers you in the tree line I
mean those um slanted trees Jonathan mentions if you go by our properties they look like they're at 30° angles from all the wind so it will be very difficult to get things to grow uh and be healthy over time in that
area uh we just get severe winds that's all I wanted to add all all right all right commissioner comments and questions Steve we're going to start with you Mr chair Mr cook has his hand up
sorry Mr chairman thank you I um I don't have any questions thank you Mr cook turn on your audio and video please am I am I on audio turn your video on
please I think I'm on audio I'm sorry can you hear me we can hear you Mr we can hear we can't see you okay um sorry about that you are yeah thank you um John Cook 170 Church Street the
only other thing I'd like to add to pass point about things difficult going now the previous owner of my property planted um and tried to irrigate extensively along the front a row of um of plants as well that were part of a
plan and we we tried to water those extensively to try to do it and none of those plants survived and that's an exact same area basically as this is um so I'm just trying to add um a little B more color to Pat's point about how
difficult it is for things to go there all right continuing with commissioner comments Courtney um I I know this is a very exposed area um my and I understand the issue with
the invasiv now um it's been suggested that you were concerned about rooting the invasives out and that that would create an erosion problem and so on but I I mean
to me if you were to uh use an herbicide that allowed you to keep the root root mass intact that would hold the soil while you got rid of the invas and then you could play it that's first thought the second question I have is before all
of this was cut down how high were the was this growth area does anybody know it's approximately chest height huh approximately chest height
okay five feet four five feet okay so um you know is it a is the problem of survivability a question of the type of plants used I mean if you go and buy Nursery stock um they're they're not liable to
be able to survive in that area because whereas if you use field grown stock Cedars and that kind of stuff their survival is tends to improve I'm not a I'm not a landscaper or an arborist but that's been my experience on the
commission so I I think you guys need to think about this a little more I think it's doable to do a restoration and get stuff not everything up to 5 feet but I think you want you want stuff I don't want to see a whole lot of time spent and you end up with one gallon plants
that are 4 in tall uh that doesn't really U restore the buffer so those are my only comments Kevin no comments Mr chairman all right
Ron no no comments all that thank you Mr chairman Ross and just one question for Mr SS um how long would it take for this stuff to grow back that you were talking about the stuff that that is rooted in I mean
is it 6 months a year two years three years is any idea the Wild Grape can grow approximately 1 to three feet a year um so yeah I would say probably to be fully back it would probably take two maybe three full growing Seasons to look
as if it was never touched um last year this happened it was late summer early fall um we did already start to see some new growth popping back up on this plant material um which is when this all started to come you know as a as a plan
of you know I think this would be the our our best plan versus Excavating or treating and causing any other potential erosion issues but I think between two to three years it would be fully grown back okay okay Mr chairman all
right Jen what's the staff's recommendation at this point staff's recommendation is to have a planting plan to restore this with Native shrubs and not allow the inra invasives just to grow back again if the board allows this
to happen you are opening an enti huge can of worms so my recommendation is a planting plan and at least to try to restore that buffer okay so procedurally are you looking for a planting plant under an
enforcement order or are we looking at a continuance to create a planting plan if the homeowners want to follow your staff's recommendation do you know what I'm asking yeah I mean I would ask Jonathan
if you and I have not had the opportunity to speak about this I have not spoken to uh Jonathan sherles either um about this project recently so we would like the opportunity to to speak with the prop owners Representatives um if they still feel
that this is their Best Way Forward just to turn the back on violation that's fine the board can decide to require a planting plan within an enforcement order at that point but at least give the staff the opportunity to talk to the applicants Representatives because this
is the first I've heard about we're just going to let it grow back Alissa also in the mean time um if the homeowners were acceptable the commission can make a site visit and see the sites for themselves so can I ask a question
procedurally hasn't this been continued multiple times yes yep okay we were initially waiting for waiting for a survey Alysa continue we were initially
waiting for a survey um the homeowners were very proactive in Contracting with an engineer uh we needed to know where your jurisdiction uh began and ended so we knew what we um what we were looking at and how much restoration the commission
would like to require okay Courtney uh if we're gonna have a planning plan I'd want to see a methodology as well all right Mr Berk he started to speak I was just excuse me I was just
adding uh Alissa filled in the delay was because of a waiting for a survey thank you all right where we at Jonathan do you want to request a continuance for the
opportunity to to meet with staff or are you going to take your chances that this board just requires that planting plan no I would like the opportunity to to discuss with Steph okay when would you like a continuance to I think that you have April 2nd or
April 16th well either of those are fine for me so if April 2nd is filling up we're happy to go April 16th um this certainly won't affect me coming and meeting with you before then y let's go with April second sure
okay at the request of the applicant I move the week continue this hearing until April the 2nd CH second all right last call questions or comments before we vote on the continuance all right we're voting to
continue this until April 2nd Courtney bir ey Kevin O'Brien I Ron Risco ey Russ Robins I Steve I it is unanimous with the quarum we
have to continue this until April 2nd thank you everyone thank you just to clarify the record this is for both properties correct yeah correct okay because we opened them as
one thank you everyone thank you thank you all right next up continuing with continued hearings under an enforcement order Jane fer 2622 and zero Shore View
Avenue map and parcel ID is 39-2 C- z-54 f with mass unpermitted removal of salt marsh vegetation and unpermitted construction of a deck within conservation
jurisdiction uh Jen or [Music] Lea Jen is promoting Tom Bunker right now who um I believe is representing the property owner is that correct Tom okay is correct is there anyone else we're
promoting no I think I think it's just me okay okay so let's start with staff because it's an enforcement order so Jen I'll hand it over to Alysa thank you um so as noted in the staff report
there were uh two violations that staff discovered on these three contiguous properties all owned by the same homeowner specifically on 26 Shore viw when reviewing aerial photos um it is evident that the back deck to the home
was reconstructed between the 2016 and 2017 near map aerial photos it was enlarged and it's within the Zone A2 a salt marsh since there are no permits on this nor building permits um the staff is requesting that a restoration plan is
developed to determine if the deck is moving closer um and and hopefully if not um that we can uh approve it after the fact with the appropriate amount of mitigation plantings um the larger violation on these properties as noted
through the various photos in your staff report is the um Mowing and degradation of the large salt Marsh um more so identified on 22 and Z Shore View um this area was part of an enforcement
order back in 2016 for restoration on the site the enforcement order was very clear in only allowing a 5- foot path from the backyard of 26 Shor view Crossing 22 on to zero to allow for water access the remainder of the salt
marish was to be allowed to grow back and areas cleared in the bvw and buffer were to be replanted um that was conducted however uh as seen in the aerial photos step is unclear as to the exact reasons but the salt marsh the the
actual resource area has been maintained it appears mowing um staff was on site in 22 and attached some of those photos which coincide with a mechanical means of maintaining the salt marsh area um
also that 5 foot path from the backyard of 26 Shore View through 22 and onto the water has also increased and decreased in size um staff has been in contact with the property owner over the years to ask for remediation on the site and
ultimately we brought the matter to the commission to seek requirements um to restore what can be restored and to allow the salt marsh to either grow back if the commission sees fit or to require restoration
um staff did briefly speak with Tom um yesterday um he is taking on the project as he did the site plan during the 2016 enforcement so I'll turn it over to him if he has any comments at this time uh thank you I um don't really have
any comments this time except we're about to start um I think when Alissa and Jan and I talked I'll jump right ahead you know saying we'll need a Contin Ence because we haven't updated our survey yet to
current conditions uh they suggested having a me meeting or having a continuance until for about four weeks uh which time we can have a we'll have have the survey done we'll have the plan of existing conditions done I'm not sure how much further we'll have but
um uh we we will have the the Baseline information at that time and you know then if we will be preparing a planting plan uh for that or whatever else staff wants us to
do so I'll keep in touch with staff and keep keep them apprised of of uh progress um as they go along and do whatever they say all right questions or comments from the
commission Alysa are you guys all right with the uh with the continuance to get a plan together and yes um I had requested um a month I understand that Tom might require more time but to at least uh
require an update as to where we are in one month just so um this doesn't get away from us that makes sense Courtney just Tom how how long realistically do you think you need I don't think I need much much more
than that we have you know as was said we we've worked on this property we have a a good background as of a few years ago for the plans that we did uh we did the plan when uh some of the other mitigation planting was done and so uh
it's not going to take a lot more survey to to get that in so by a month I think be pretty far along but I don't think we' be complete it might just be a couple more weeks after that okay
thanks so let's do the the month and see where we are I sounds good I'll there's no other questions I'll make a motion to uh what do we have for a date Jen April
16th at the request of the applicant I move that we continue this hearing until was it 16th yes Courtney yeah of April f second thank you we have a motion in a second to continue this
matter until April 16 last call questions or comments voting on the continuance Courtney bird I Matthews I Kevin O'Brian I Ron risot Russ Robin ey
Steve p i is unanimous we have continued this until April 16 thank you Mr bunker thank you thanks Tom see you in the month you can come back sooner we're okay with
that okay I'll find something thank you we appreciate that yeah don't give us too much idle time all right next up vote orders of conditions first up Richard C 64
Edgewater Drive East East Falmouth Mass second um the quum is all of us here small deck off the front no big deal oh this is Mr Collins's project small addition in the front of the house
mitigation in the back Alyssa did we receive a revised plan the day after we did he's corrected mitigation to for feet on Center and he's added the salt marsh buffer perfect and delineation yep and did he add the
drywall got to look at that part I think he was talking about perhaps tying it into the existing system depending on what happened okay I a gas line yeah oh I think we just lost Alyssa she was oh there she's back I
realiz it I'm sorry my internet's not great um he might be tying it into the existing system he wasn't quite sure yet okay thank you all right anything anybody want to see in there all right what do you think
I'll make a uh a motion to uh Grant an order of conditions as discussed fisal second all right we have a motion and a second to issue an order of conditions last call questions comments or input we're voting to issue an order of
conditions Courtney bird ey Matthews ey Kevin O'Brien I Ron fiscal ey Russ Robin I Steve and I it is unanimous we have issues in order of [Music]
conditions next up Nathan Pier 196 metoxit Road East fouth mask uh yes this is for um uh uh this is a house project the board has seen in in past
um but it is um house it's going up on I guess low profile piling but it is being it is being raised um to uh above the velocity Zone they've kind of moved
it a a tad further back from the um Coastal Bank um they need to remove all of the uh unpermitted out hols they have over there
um and um our only concern was the oak tree next to I believe the house they they're insisting that they're going to try to save that that would be great if they can um but staff is well aware that it might be removed
um Alysa had her hand up but she's Frozen but maybe we can still hear her um that's all I have Mr chairman all right she's back Al Alissa wasn't the best time for my internet to act up now that we're here um it was
just to readjust the limit of work off the top of the bank and into the the buffer so we'll get a revised plan from Mike with the readjusted limit of work this is a good plan I mean it's it's like the last one with the
improvements that um we were kind of hoping for um procedural this disorder conditions would supersede the last order I always forget because we don't do that this that often okay all right
Courtney um I think we should just have a condition in there that if the oak can't be saved that they plant uh another tree yeah you know yeah with a certain calber long as that's in there that's
fine I do think they um this probably could have been an amendment I'm not quite sure why Mike uh filed the notice but I think he probably just thought because they were using part of the old house in the first design and then this is an
entirely new structure he felt probably safer going the notice route but I think in the presentation it they just couldn't make the older part of the house work with a newer addition with the new building code
yeah well I like this process it was cleaner I mean I know it you know the effort that the owner and and the engineer puts in but but it's just much cleaner for us to deal with I mean and you saw that because that hearing lasted
like three and a half minutes so you know so it it's it's appreciated if you're listening Mike or Mr Perry all right anything anybody want to see in there different
additional all right I'll make a motion to issue an order of conditions as discussed Drisco second all right we have a motion in a second to issue an order of conditions last call we're voting Courtney bird ey
Matthews Z Kevin O'Brien I Ron RIS I Russ Rob Steve I it is unanimous we have issue in order of conditions next up Katherine M Truman 78
Benjamin n Lane North fouth bass this was the invasive removal project by um parent uh Patera ecological um Lindsay from Patera
ecological um with some landscape improvements and I believe a new parking yeah new little parking area um over on Benjamin N I think the only
concern was the amount of shrubs that beta was uh initially proposing um I think it does it will require more shrubs but we can work with Lindsay and her team once they get all
the invasives removed fair enough Melissa nothing else to add at this time she uh made all the other Corrections excellent anything anybody want to see in their additional or different all right what are you
thinking oh oh I'm sorry wait wait wait um is not on this forum okay all right go ahead Court uh I'll make a motion to issue an order conditions as discussed need a second there got to be
somebody else yeah I'm not on it right correct second thank you all right we have a motion in a second to issue an order of conditions last call for questions or comments we're voting to issue an order of conditions Courtney
bird ey Matthews Z Kevin O'Brien I Russ Robin Z Steve m i it is unanimous with this Quorum we have issued an order of conditions next up is to vote amended
order of conditions first up Joseph G marzola trustee Joseph G mariza a revocable trust 2018 15 Moses [Music]
Road um this is to allow the stairs that were built larger um and closer to uh the resource area um to remain and I think the board had some
discussion about whether the it was necessary from a safety standpoint um to have the stairs in this location um or if they was done for some
sort of aesthetic reason um so what would the board like to do remind me what was the staff's opion of where the seaw wall is well I mean I sorry the patio wall I
don't know what to call it the seaw wall W I'm talking about what was the question Jamie you were going in and out I apologize sorry what's your take on the the the proximity to that wall the coastal b line of the Coastal
Bank the wall is the Coastal Bank and it is moving closer to the Coastal Bank the wall is the Coastal Bank yeah the wall is that vertical the wall is actually the top of your bank because your Beach is right there so it is it is moving closer to the
beach by I think was it Alissa one a half a foot yeah something like that um which sounds minimal but it's the width of the stairway it's not the run so it's from my perspective it's not a
safety thing it was an oversight I would say that somebody just wasn't following the plane man I I don't know I'm not throwing anybody under the bus in that regard but I mean you guys have heard me before saying you know I I like a good run on a Stairway that you know that
that promotes safety but this has nothing to do with it it's just it just made it wider so oh yeah I know this one yeah well you know so go ahead
Courtney my inclination is that the wider stairway is uh not what was on the plan and it should be cut back we shouldn't allow it they could easily if it's four feet wide rather
than five they can still meet code on egas so I I think we should require it to be fix brought to code I think we start setting precedence that I'm concerned about well yeah so just Carin on
this Russ no I I gota agree with the Courtney I I went over from my own curiosity and measured everything up um you got 42 Ines on the inside post to post actually
it's from a it's U an inch and a quarter um round grab rail on the inside and it's about 42 in so I think they could I I believe the number was 8 in it was over right it should have been 58 and
it's actually 5 feet right now um I I agree with Courtney you keep letting this happen it just you know it gradually creeps and creeps and creeps and I I you know I I think they can come up with that 8 inches and and if you
look at the building plan it even shows that deck flush with that back wall so and if you measure that that's 11 in us so um I think they should have to uh make it right okay so just so you know
procedurally what we're going to want is a motion in a second to issue an order of conditions and then if you don't agree with it you're going to vote against it just to be clear correct and you know I so again just so we're clear
Courtney just one question to confirm code is a minut minimum of 3T clear inside rail to wall is that correct I mean that's what it used to be I just want to make sure it's 36 wall toall or
post to post and then the handrails allowed to be inside of that so so in other words what the reason I'm asking is that they certainly have plenty of room to make a Stairway that meets code am I correct
okay all right any other questions or comments anything anybody want to see in there all right what are you thinking I'll make a motion to issue an order of conditions as
discussed positive that's an approval motion so if we want to vote it down you just no correct all right Steve did I hear you a second thank you was speaking over you we have a
motion in a second to issue an order of conditions last call questions or comments we're voting to issue an order of conditions Courtney bird no Matthews no Kevin no Ron
no Russ Robins no Steve Patton no it is unanimous we have I don't know the term to use we denied an order of conditions yeah denied amended order of
conditions correct me so there so their option is to come back to us with a corrected plan and well or New Order conditions with a correct plan that we can approve no they can just fix it and then ask for
compliance yeah oh okay all right next up we're still under amended order of conditions Laura toret 10 Circle Road Falmouth [Music] Mass yes Mr chairman this is to rebuild
a deck and a little kind of beach house Shack that's on the deck um to rebuild it in basically in kind and to no and to remove an unpermitted section um so they're bringing it back to the original uh chapter 91 approved
license configuration y ala she's Frozen all right we'll come back to Alysa anybody else questions comments or input make a motion to issue an order of
conditions is discussed trisco second we didn't give Alysa a chance hold on Alyssa do you have anything you want to add I miss it's okay thank you all right so we have a motion and a
second issue an order of conditions as discussed last call questions or comments we're voting to issue an order of conditions Courtney bird ey Matthews I Kevin O'Brien I Ron Chrisi Russ Robins
I Steve Pon hi all right before you get all excited we have two things to throw at you first off just a reminder there's no meeting next week and Jen has something she'd like to
share with us yes there is no meeting next week but you do have your regulatory review meeting on Thursday starting at 3:30 things what day is that of the week Thursday at 3:30
Courtney we have the regular we have the regulation I know what day of the week 20th Thursday no no no I understand date the 20th 20thth thank you there's no hearing next Wednesday
but you do have a review on Thursday and the only thing I wanted to add make sure I didn't have a contact it's okay I'll remind you next week Court um so this board had an executive session a few weeks ago to discuss uh
with the 300 committee and the compact of Cape Cod about purchasing a particular property um we have learned from the 300 committee this week um that the property owner has withdrawn the
um withdrawn his offer to sell there was little explanation um so therefore we will not be submitting a application to the CPC at this time if there's any additional information received by the
300 committee I will inform this board that's all I wanted to say thank you oh and the 300 committee would like to uh thank the commission for working with them working with the Compact and considering the proposal so that's all
important part of that message yes that is the important part last motion who wants it um Mr chair as um Vice PR Vice chair resident ker mudin and Senior member of this commission I move the we
adjourn Brisco second bird ey simple Matthew's ey O'Brian I chisco ey Robins ey Mt I it is unanimous word Jour thank you everyone
thank you good night everyone good night