Heat. Heat. Good evening. Welcome to the June 24th, 2026 meeting of the Falmouth Conservation Commission. This meeting is being held virtually via Zoom video conference and is also being broadcast by FCTV on cable channel 9. As this
meeting is being recorded by Zoom and broadcast by FCTV, please be cognizant of what you say, how you say it, and what can be seen and heard in your background. Uh we are missing a couple of commissioners. However, we have a quorum
and we will be going forward. I'd like to remind the commissioners that for commenting I will call on each of you in turn. So please refrain from speaking over each other. Also all votes are done by roll call. So when I call your name, please state your name and your vote for the record, even if you've
made the motion or second. To our public attendees, at any time during this meeting, you may enter any comments or questions via the chat function. At the appropriate time, they will be read into the record. If as an attendee you'd like to participate in a particular hearing, let us know via the
chat function, then at the appropriate time you will be promoted 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 three minutes each.
Regarding RDAs, under a request for determination of applicability, the applicant is asking the commission to determine if the provisions of the Massachusetts Wetland Protection Act and or the Falmouth Wetlands bylaw apply to the proposed project. A negative
determination is that the provisions of the act 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 may or require some conditions. Therefore, the project would
require a notice of intent application. So, as an applicant, you want to hear a negative determination. For the benefit of anybody waiting for particular hearing tonight and so that you're not waiting unnecessarily, the following hearings are expected to be continued. 32 Siri Lane Falmouth
21 Davis Neck Road Felmouth 41 Davis Neck Road Felmouth All right, 30th 2026 Anybody like to make a motion? >> Oh, we didn't hear it. I'm sorry.
>> We didn't didn't hear it. Sorry, Dale. >> Your your vid audio cut out. >> Oh, my bad. So, yeah. So, the uh start is a review and approve minutes. We'll start it with May 30th, 2026. I will entertain a motion. I'll
make a motion to accept the the minutes. So the 30th >> second motion and a second questions seeing none call roll. Jim >> McGrath I >> Dave
>> Kent I >> Steve >> Matt and I >> Dan >> Walsh I >> and FI. Meeting minutes for May 30th have been accepted. accept a motion for the June 3rd minutes. Mr.
>> Chairman, I make a motion to approve the minutes of June 3rd. Patent >> 10 second. >> Got a motion, a second to approve the meeting minutes for June 3rd. Any questions? Seeing none, I will call the role. Jim >> Grath I,
>> Dave, >> Kent, I, >> Steve, >> I, >> Dan, >> Walsh, I, >> and Duffy. I meeting minutes for June 3rd have been approved. I'll accept a motion for the meeting minutes of June 10th, 2026.
>> Chairman, I make a motion to approve the minutes of June 10th. Patton >> 10. Second. >> Got a motion, a second to approve the meeting minutes for June 10th. Any questions? Seeing none. Jim >> McGrath I >> Dave
>> Tanti. >> Steve I. Dan >> and DIY. Meeting minutes for June 10th, 2026 have been approved. I'll entertain a motion to accept the meeting minutes for J the June 10th, 2026 executive session.
>> Chairman, make a motion to accept the June 10th executive session minutes. Patton >> 10 second. >> Motion a second to approve the executive session. No questions seen. Jim >> Grath I >> Dave
>> Kent I. Steve and >> I >> Dan >> Walshy >> and FBI meeting minutes for the executive session of June 10th have been accepted. First RDA we have Alexander Colinki 107
t path found with mass for permission to replace rotted deck pilings in kind. Fallon >> fallon you're muted or frozen? It looks like he froze. >> Yeah, >> I think she froze. I can jump in here. >> Okay.
>> Um, staff recommends a negative two. Under the state and bylaw, resource area boundaries are not confirmed. These negative determinations indicate that work described in this RDA is within an area subject to protection, but will not remove, fill, dredge, or alter the area. Therefore, said work does not require the filing of a notice of intent.
>> Make a motion issue order conditions as discussed. If you guys can read the um >> the determination. >> I can't. >> That's okay. Does anyone have the RDA paperwork in front of them? >> Sure. So, >> thanks, Dan.
>> Didn't you just read it? >> I know there there's a section that you guys have to say now. I'm sorry. >> It's all right. >> We move to determine that the work described within the area subject to protection, but will not remove, dread, fill, or alter the area.
>> Second. Got a motion and a second. Any questions? Seeing none, I will call the role. Jim >> Bra I. >> Dave, >> I. >> Steve, >> I >> Dan >> Walsh. I
>> Tffy I. The RDA has been approved. Next we have John 15 Bay Road, Felmouth, Mass. permission to construct an addition, install a drywall, and remove a deck in unpermitted hardscape. Also >> staff recommends a negative three under
the state and a negative two under the bylaw. Resource area boundaries are not confirmed. >> We can't make the motion. I don't have the language. >> That's okay. We're looking at Dan. >> It'll just be the same sentence. >> That's right. I move to determine that
the work described is within an area subject to protection but will not remove, fill, dredge, or alter the area. Regress. >> Second. Got a motion and a second. Any questions? Seeing none, I will call the roll. Jim
>> McGrath, >> I. >> Dave, >> I. >> Steve, >> Matt, I >> Dan >> Walshy, >> and Duffy, I motion passes. Next we have Paul Zeros, trustee,
Pants Reality Trust, 385 Edgewood Drive, West Falmouth, Mass for permission to install plantings in accordance with Mass DP number 25-220 and for the after the fact permission to expand a driveway, install a shed, and
remove trees. Melissa >> staff recommends a negative three under the state and a negative two under the bylaw. Resource area boundaries are not confirmed. So assuming there's no question they move to determine that the work described within the area is within area subject to protection but will not
remove fill dredge or alter the area. >> McGrath second >> got a motion and a second. Any questions? Seeing none I will call roll. Jim >> McGrath I >> Dave >> I >> Steve
>> Dan >> Walsh I >> and FBI motion passes. Next we've got John D'Angelo trustee Aina Reality Trust to Pinerove Avenue Falmouth Mass for permission to
construct a single family dwelling with an attached garage and install a new Title 5 sewage disposal system. staff recommends a negative 200 the state and bylaw resource area boundaries are not confirmed and this project solely takes place in an AV flood zone.
>> All right. I move to determine that the work described is within an area subject to protection but will not remove fill bridge or alter the area. >> Second. >> Got a motion and a second. Any questions?
I'll call the role. Jim >> McGrath I >> Dave >> Hank I >> Steve >> I >> Dan >> Paul I >> and Duffy I motion passes. Next we have some notice of attendance.
All hearings of the Falmouth Conservation Commission are held simultaneously under the authorities of the Massachusetts Wetland Protection Act in the Falmouth Wetland bylaws. Although a single decision of the commission is issued, it represents a separate decision under each authority. As a reminder, public commenting is
limited 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 in the fmouth wetlands bylaws and how they pertain to a particular application. Please know that all correspondence received by the conservation department
is forwarded to all commissioners and becomes part of the record. We will not read each and every letter received at a hearing. Remember, our jurisdiction is that of the Massachusetts Wetland Protection Act and the Falmouth Wetland bylaws, not zoning, health, or building.
>> Mr. Chairman, just a question for you. >> Maybe I've got a somewhat old agenda. I think there's one before this, right? This is 24 five gates land. There's one more continued RDA. >> Yep. I just realized that and missed it. So, I've got my spiel done for RD uh for
the notice of intent, but we will go to continued request for determination of applicability. John J. Toyus revocable trust 24 5gate lane Falmouth, Mass for permission to construct a pool cabana and after the fact permission to
construct a front walkway, remove vegetation, install a pool patio, reconfigure a driveway, and construct a retaining wall. phone. >> Oh, we can't hear you. >> I see your mouth moving, but we can't hear you.
>> How about now? >> Okay, let's try again. Bear with me here. Doc recommends a negative -2 under the state and bylaw. Resource area boundaries are not confirmed. This project is fully in an AE flood zone.
>> So, I have a question. So, you have some extensive notes on this property. Do you do you >> Yes. >> Should you have a plan given the amount of work that's been done and the changes that you guys are requesting or are you satisfied you can handle this separately?
>> We did get a revised plan. Uh there was just a couple additional details that we wanted them to put on. Um, so they submitted one revised plan and we are waiting for a subsequent revised plan just showing some additional vegetation. >> Got it. All right. Thank you. Then I'll
move to determine that the work described in the area is within an area subject to protection but will not remove fill dredge or alter the area. >> Gra second. >> Got a motion a second. Any other questions? Seeing none, I will call the role. Jim >> McGrath I
>> Dave >> Dan I. Steve >> and I >> Dan >> Alshai >> and Duffy I motion passes. All right. First up for request of a hearing under notice of intent we got Joseph and Nancy Buckley 32 Siri Lane
Eastbound with permission to permit an existing deck construct a retaining wall, replace a patio, install drywalls, and install mitigation plantings. Believe this is going to be continued. >> Yes, the applicant has requested a continuence until July 22nd.
Make a motion to continue this hearing until July 22nd. The request of the applicant. Patton. >> McGrath. Second. >> Got a motion and a second to continue the hearing till July 22nd. Any questions? Seeing none, I will call the role. Jim
>> Grath I. >> Dave. >> Dan. >> I. >> Steve >> and I. >> Dan. >> All. >> And Duff. Yeah. Motion passes to continue this hearing until July 22nd. Next up, we got John G. Merl Senna,
Trustee. John G. Mel Trust Family Trust, 15 Beach Street, found with Mass for permission to install mitigation resto restoration plantings and for after the fact permission to construct a deck. Melissa, >> thank you. Yes, I am promoting. Is it
Chuck Fallon? Yes. All right, Chuck Roland from Cape Islands Engineering to present his project. >> Can you hear me? Okay, >> we can. Do you have a video component tonight, Chuck?
>> There we go. Hi, Chuck. >> Is everything working all right now? Seems to be a lot more buttons than normal tonight. >> I'll be looking at that. Sorry about that. >> So, I started to talk, but it sounds like you didn't hear me. So, uh, Chuck
Roland, Capen Islands Engineering. I'm going to share my plan with you. >> See if I can find it. For some reason I It's not popping up here. See if this shares it. I don't know what you guys can see on
your end. >> Just a horizontal line. >> Nice. Otherwise, it's black. >> Um, I think I think we're making progress here. >> Does that look better?
>> Yes. We're waiting. It's all black. >> Yeah. Here we go. >> All right. So, uh, as I said before, um, Chuck Roland, Capen Islands Engineering, representing 15 Beach Street for John
Merina Family Trust. Um, this project, uh, started off as a certificate of compliance request, uh, for the house. Um during research of the property uh it was found that the uh existing structure
um did not receive a certificate of compliance for um project number 25-808 um which was for a filing in 1986. So I have to tell you that this is probably
one of my oldest uh COC requests I've ever done. Um and so during the process of reviewing that we found that there were some minor discrepancies. Um and but the major one is that the uh deck
boardwalks uh second floor deck uh did not receive approval. Uh generally the rest of it is within compliance. The house is generally in the right area. There's a gravel driveway which the order required. It is shifted over slightly. And so part of this filing is
for the approval of this deck and hardscape. And we have shown the proposed mitigation uh both on the west side and on the east side. And then when we looked at the site further, there was um an old filing
for vista pruning which um appears probably went beyond their um approval for the RDA of the Vista pruning. So, we've shown some native plantings in this area as well as two trees. So, I'll just kind of run through kind of the
highlights of the filing. So, this applicant proposes to install approximately 2,199 square ft of navy plantings to mitigate for the enlarged deck uh within the buffer zone A and land sub coastal storm flowish. The applicant also proposes to
restore 2, uh, 960 ft of Vista corridor, which is cleared uh, rather than enhanced um, the approved pruning activities approved under a negative determination of applicability in 2017. Um, so we've got a kind of a bunch of
other notes here, but that's generally the crux of it. Um, and then in response to some of the staff comments, uh, we are requesting to be able to prune the black tupulos to so that way we can keep the 25- ft buffer, um, that was approved
under the, um, RDA. Um, we would like to be able to keep kind of keep things at high five feet high um, just because that is kind of what the area is right now. just that way we can be able to see when we walk around the
building. Um, and then within the restored area, we uh we're amendable to request to adding some of the salt marsh tolerant plants is probably a good idea. Um, and
let's see here. Uh, we're happy to have an on-site meeting with the contractor beforehand. Um, we do believe that we staked it properly with this area up here. Um, I think Fallon had a question about that.
And then, uh, we did note Bayberry listed twice. Uh, but I think that we meant to say, uh, Bayberry was 50% for the mitigation planting. Uh, so we have it Bayberry listed there and Bayberry listed there. So, uh, Fallon and Alyssa
do have a keen eye and they kind of catch me on some of my minor scribers errors. Um, additionally, we are requesting irrigation. Um, we are going to be planting this as part of a closing. So, we do need irrigation so
that way we can um, uh, warranty the plants coming into the uh, warm season. And then we are requesting that the um commission approve uh a quicker time frame than that you guys typically allow for uh the
plants to get uh healed in as this is part of a closing. So we're hoping that we can get these plants in the air areas restored um get a certificate of compliance both for uh the uh filing from the 80s as well as this notice of
intent. uh so that way we can move forward with a clean uh transfer of title. I know it's a um not a request that you hear all the time, but we kind of do have a unique circumstance where um the original owner had passed away
and then his heirs are trying to clean up and um transfer the estate um so that way they can um sell the property. With that, I'm happy to take any questions. Thanks, Chuck. You can stop sharing.
>> Sure. >> All right, Melissa, >> I'm going to pass this over to Fallon for her questions. Thank you. >> Oh, Fallon, >> thank you. Hopefully my computer laughs for this. Um, thank you, Chuck.
So, a couple things that you said in your presentation that I want to quickly address. Um, I mean, you mentioned still pruning the tupelo and keeping everything at a height of five feet. Um,
we can circle back to that once everything is established, but I don't agree with pruning the trees and shrubs immediately after planted. Uh in my staff report I mentioned once everything is established we can go back out to see
if any further vista pruning is applicable on the site. Um so I do not agree with your point there for the mitigation staking. Did you see the photo in the >> I did I went to the site and I mostly looked at the other side of the
mitigation. Um so before we kind of move on I I think that's fair. We can we can kind of circle back with the planting afterwards. I I that's we can live with that. Um and then uh the I did look at the staking uh and I and I mostly looked
at the staking on the east side. Uh I didn't really scrutinize the planting on the west side. If that's our really only sticking point, um I'm happy to go there tomorrow morning and make sure that we
stake um you know that that geometry is outside of the clearing area. Um we we clearly probably did this survey several months ago and with things starting to bud, I wouldn't be surprised if maybe some of the branches started to grow
out. Um but um yeah, we're we're we'll I can I can if that's our major sticking point, I will 100% uh go out there tomorrow morning and take some photos and make sure that we have a certain amount of area. But
like I um showed in the mitigation planting, um not only did I show an area, but I showed the uh amount of plants. So, no matter what, uh, we'll be putting in the plants. And so, that way it's kind of set kind of on the record plan exactly
how many plants we need to put in, as well as the kind of geometry of where we're going to be putting things. >> Okay. Yeah. I just wanted to make sure that the mitigation would be in the lawn instead of I think it was basically like a sea of poison ivy and then some other
vegetation growing um for that other smaller mitigation area. So, if you could check on that, maybe send photos if you do add more stakes or something, we can figure that out. I know there was just kind of um we spoke to someone that had some confusion, so we wanted to
double check on that. Um the irrigation that you mentioned is fine. It would have to be above ground. I just want to clarify that. >> That's fine. >> Instead of Okay. Um and the issue of the
COC um staff cannot support issuing an expedited COC in the circumstance especially given the amount of plantings that are being put in at this time. It's a extremely large amount of mitigation
and restoration that needs to be put in for this one. Um, but for that I guess you could come back when you feel is right to ask the commission for that one. I think that's really everything that I have. Chuck addressed everything else.
So, thank you. >> Lisa, anything to add? >> Um, just supporting Fallon's comments regarding the COC. I know it's not an ideal situation, but there are some ways around that with escrow and whatnot. Um,
but if you wanted to exercise your right to ask the board, there's that option, too. Thank you. >> All right. I will um take commissioners questions and comments. I'll start with you, Dan. >> Um, I don't I think I think I get it. I guess I'm really trying to get from
staff what the recommendation is for the next step. It seems like there's a bunch of questions and I'm not certain Fallon whether you're satisfied that you got all the answers or whether you're looking for more data and you're on mute f.
>> Yes, thank you. Um I think overall I am in support of this. It's mainly correcting previous mistakes. Um before the plants go in, we do really want to have that site visit to confirm spacing
uh to see where species are proposed. Some species on the list are things like sweet pepper bush that may do well closer to the house but not closer to the salt marsh. So, we just want to speak to whoever will be conducting the
work to make sure we're kind of all on the same page so we can ensure that the plants thrive once they're in. >> I got it. So, it sounds mostly like finetuning. >> Yep. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. And no other comments, >> Dave.
Chuck, I was a little confused about the history here. Something happened in ' 86 and then I'm not sure this is property has been in front of our commission one time before and that was an RDA. Could you brief me again a little more on the history? >> Sure. So there was a order of conditions
uh from 1986 for a septic system uh and then there was an RDA in 2017 and then there was actually another RDA in uh 2025 >> as recently as last as last year. Huh. it it wasn't us but uh and it wasn't
caught that this order was not uh closed out >> and um now you mentioned a closing um seems like there's a lot to lot to accomplish here it seems I mean are we do we have timing problems here are we are we going to
is this going to have the timing about here is that going to have pro cause problems with the closing >> uh can you ask that question one more time I didn't quite understand There's a decent amount to do here. We have to have a site visit and some other things and some plantings and then come back and check about pruning. And I just
wondering how does this all compare to what the what the property owner is hoping for on the closing time schedule. >> Um I I don't really have exact specifics about when this closing is, but it's important that this closing happens. So, uh we we they definitely want to get the
this approved and the plants installed as well as the irrigation. uh and things healed in. And then um I know it's not a staff's recommendation, but we probably will be coming back for um a COC request
fairly soon. Um so all all parties involved want to get this uh behind them. >> And I guess this is a question for staff, I guess, but uh so uh are we presuming everything we have to accomplish here has to be done before closing? Is that the overall presumption
here? That's that's what I've been asked to pursue. Um, but the the COC is a different kind of that's a different animal. Obviously, we'll be coming back when we can with that once I feel comfortable that all the work has been done. Um, they have engaged Joyce
Landscaping. So, it's it's not like they have an offcape company or somebody that's less reputable. So, they they do have a good landscape company all teed up. So, as soon as um we get an approval uh and we work through these last couple
of um plants on the plant list, I think that they're going to be um installing these plants. Pretty short order. >> Yeah, the COC is really not a concern for the commission tonight. I think he's just trying to give you guys some context as to why they're here and how they want to, you know, keep the process
moving. Um that's sort of a timetable that the homeowners and future homeowners will need to figure out. Yeah. >> Yeah. And >> I do want to add really quickly, um, I've been speaking to various people since last August, making it known that
there was this open COC and issues on the site. Um, so the commission should not feel rushed into any decisions based on a closing. >> That's it. >> Right. Well, that's all for me,
>> Steve. Um my interest was more in the rightway. I mean the the uh view corridor. >> Yep. >> And then the idea is that you'll clean that up and put in some plantings. I'm not sure. >> Oh yeah. 2 960 square ft of native
planting. And um the Vista corridor we've um showed uh two tupulos and uh 118 uh plants including ink berry, bay berry, and sweet pepper bush. >> Right. Well, thanks. I I was um
reluctant to walk all the way down to where I assume your salt maride markers were due to poison ivy and other conditions. But um it how close does it come to water or
I originally thought you the sign said water view and I thought heck you got water. Oh no you don't have water access. Okay. But that was my major area concern. You think you can appears you're ready to address that. That'll be quite a project.
>> Yeah. I think that they're pretty pretty ready to go. >> Okay. That's all, sir. >> Thanks, Steve. Jim, >> yeah, I just had some questions on that um that little mitigation area on the left there. I guess that's the west
side, but Fallon kind of addressed it in her comments, so I'm good to go, Mr. Chairman. >> All right. And anything that I was going to bring up has already been addressed. Um, so Alyssa, I think there's a chat comment, so if you want to promote the
individual. I know Miss Scott is a potential um buyer here, so I'll promote her as a panelist. >> Hi, Miss Scott. Can you hear us? >> I can. Oh, there I am. Um >> there you go. >> So, thank you very much. I um appreciate
you pulling me in. Again, I'm Laura Scott and I am the prospective buyer and um you know, appreciate everyone's effort here. As um I'm certainly motivated to get this project going so that we can close. I did want to mention that um
getting the COC is incredibly important to be able to close on this project and um not expediting and getting to that um will make be an ad severe adverse impact to the fellow and to me as well. So I
just wanted to make that comment. I understand that there's history. Um, obviously that's, you know, that's not something that I was involved in and it sounds like, you know, this is a longstanding issue and sadly, you know, the original
owner is no longer with us. So I would just ask um some some accommodation as as as much as possible to get to a um a compliance of certificate and get this closed so that we can move forward once the plantings
are done. Of course >> right thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right. It looks like we have enough to um close and anything else we can take advisement. Perfect.
>> Yes. >> So I'll move to issue an order to conditions as discussed and with the careful attention of staff patent. >> Well to close the hearing. >> Close the hearing. Right. >> Close the hearing. I'm sorry sir.
>> No worries. >> We got a motion. We got a motion, a second to close the hearing. Any questions? Any more in the chat? Melissa. >> Nothing else in the chat. And >> perfect. I will call >> No hands raised.
>> Dan >> Walsh, >> Dave, >> I >> Steve, >> Jim, >> I >> and Duffy eye. Motion to close the hearing and take it on advisement has passed. Thank you, Chuck. >> Thank you. Have a good night,
>> Chuck. Chuck. Thank you, Chuck. >> All right, next we have I believe Joshua B. Bernstein, trustees, 282 Quissid Avenue, lot 2 Fmouth, Mass for permission to construct a single family
dwelling with deck and patio. Install a title 5 sewage disposal system and install mitigation plantings. Alyssa, >> I have promoted Tom Bunker with BSS design to present his project. I've also promoted Bob Ament um who I believe will
have a couple comments um from Amit Clower. Anybody else Tom? >> Uh no, Mike is off at a meeting in Mashby. Uh I think the architect perhaps the landscape architect are looking on. Um but I haven't heard that I don't know
that they want to speak at all unless something really comes up. But I'm sure Bob and I can handle it. >> All right. Thank you. >> All right. was uh there's Bob. Um you know what? I'll I'll start off with a uh
is to put my I've heard there's difficulty with sharing. I always have that anyway, but if I may, I'll uh >> I'll fix it. Sorry, guys. >> All right. The floor is yours, Tom. >> Okay. Thank you. Whoops.
Uh kind of I got my thing up here, but let me see if you >> It's coming up. >> It's coming. >> They're coming. >> Hey, >> we can see it though. >> Okay. Yeah, but now I can't I might have
to move things around to a different screen. Okay. Well, anyway, uh yeah, for now, this is uh for the record, my name is Tom Bunker, and it's part of this is easier to uh describe at least the existing conditions starting off with this plan. Uh it's in the narrative that
this plan and the only reason way we can >> we see your email, Tom. >> Excuse me. >> We see your email, >> your list of emails. You're in your inbox. >> There you go. >> You see that now? Okay.
>> All right. Um yeah. So anyway, this is the plan that they the dividing the lot. Um the existing house 282 is is this one right here. It's a house in the garage. We we did this uh in uh
about a dozen or so years ago. this this house was constructed and uh we added three created three lots out of it with a rather odd shape because we had to stay 10 ft away from the septic system. There's a bridge structure here that you
saw that leads from the parking. The parking is on lot two runs over to lot one as a structure the property line to be 10 ft away from that and 10 ft away from this other bridge structure and it the property line extended should say 25 ft
away from uh peers on a budding property. So uh this is lot two right here. You can see we have quite harbor in this area here. So uh uh there's a flood zone
velocity flood zone through here. And yes that is on this planet is labeled as uh Alyssa pointed out flood zone X not AE15. Um but then AE15 does cross this bit of the lot and goes
over into uh covering the lot three which is right here and also onto the property of an abuing owner uh Weinstein on on this property. And so of course where this flood zone there's usually coastal banks and I can
show some of that. You can see why it's it's easier on the plan of land. But the uh on this plan I the uh all these red lines are zone A's and the most important part are probably are the zone B's because this project this is the proposed house the existing house is up
here the uh parking lot in this location with the bridge crossing over the gully. Um this wide green line is the landwardmost
zone B of uh coastal banks. So there's flood zone here obviously coastal bank on this steep part. Um running along here is coastal bank uh and the the zone B 100 foot zone Bs go
out to here. Uh there's coastal bank down where this flood zone uh settles into this low area with wetland. This coastal bank along here and so the 100 foot coastal bank zone is right there. Originally we had uh talked Mike and I
had talked with uh Jen and Alyssa and um at the time we talked there was nothing in zone B. Uh but uh actually I had to adjust the existing conditions plan. So it turns out the coastal bank uh shaves off a corner of this house
here uh and it isund and or is this rather 72 square ft uh from this uh corner here and uh part of the
bulkhead here is 72 square ft. Uh we put the uh mitigation down in on lot three. Uh we feel Bob and I have talked about that we feel that's permissible because uh it's currently all under the same
title of the same owner um if the uh the order can be uh uh recorded on the title to lot three and it will run with it as far as as far as uh maintaining mitigation planting on
here. I know there used to be uh language in the regulations that allowed uh mitigation to go on land owned by or controlled by the uh applicant. This is what we have have going on here.
And it does say that the mitigation should be in the zone A of the resource area. And the figure this is the um the the zone B of the coastal bank and the zone A of that coastal bank is here.
Um and there's also in the zone A of the wetland. So I actually feel this is probably the the most uh it's a small amount of mitigation but it perhaps would do the most good in this location uh to stay on lot too. It
could be up here also if it's so required. I'm sure the landscape architect Stimson can find a good place for it but we would still like it over on lot three. Um so this uh anyway is the limit of
jurisdiction here. So there's a very small amount the limit of work going on to lot one is here is out of jurisdiction but there is a little bit of the limit of work here. This is for grading some slight grading of this lawn
area. It's lawn now and it will remain lawn, but this limit does go up into uh out of the lawn and we could move it down if if that would be important to move that limit to right along where the edge of
the lawn is there. Um we filed this uh it's in priority habitat of endangered species and that is a um believe it's a flyway. It it covers the
entire peninsula of Cape Cod from from uh Vineyard Sound by Fay Road across the Quistet Harbor. Covers a large area and it's a flyway from the vineyard to uh the mainland. So, we had to file with
Misa. Misa takes a while. Um and actually, we just got a request for more information and replied to it today. And the word is it might take 30 days from the time they get the entire file um all
their information. So we will need a continuence on that respect. Uh Alyssa kind of you know this this had been flagged this wetland had been flagged uh years ago.
Um, but I realized that more than three years ago and it it we'd have to do it again and I did uh request that LEC do the flagging. We do have to if you know that the LEC and other wetland scientists are leerary
of going on another property. Uh so we're requesting permission from the owners of this property to have LEC go on there to flag the wetlands so we can get the data sheets to you. Um, so
that's that's the proposal. We're we're here very much because it's in natural heritage and a little bit because we have a little bit of uh of uh of uh new coverage in a zone B with a little bit
of mitigation required. Um, and so that's I'll I'll take that down unless Bob wants to talk about this plan of all. I'll I'll take down my share. We can then talk about it. >> You might leave that
up, Tom, and I'll just talk about the uh issue of the location of the proposed mitigation, which is all of about 150 square feet or about uh maybe 10 plants. First, the the the 4 acre parcel, which
is the site, um has not yet been divided. The planning board has endorsed a plan showing the proposed lot lines, but those are future lot lines, and we haven't yet recorded the plan dividing
the property. and the limit of work extends slightly both onto lot one that is future lot one and onto future lot three. Um so clearly the the the site
which is entirely in common ownership it's just owned by the same uh trust and um Lisa and Josh Bernstein are the trustees. um you know that's the site and there
isn't any provision in the regulations that uh requires mitigation to be on the same lot but in fact it is on the same existing lot and there's nothing that says that a piece of property subject to
an order of conditions can't subsequently be divided and anytime the conservation commission would be involved in for instance approving a subdivision road, they'd be approving work done before the lots are then divided. But the order of conditions
would then be on the entire property. So the order of conditions here will be on all the land owned by the Bernsteeen uh which will be uh future lots one, two, and three. And it's my understanding
um first of all Tom has mentioned that the location should be at the in the A zone of the resource area um that we're within the buffer area of and that's what he's shown. Um and
um you know we think this is the a perfectly good location and our understanding is that as long as we are up against the resource area uh on property owned by the applicant
um we get to pick where that mitigation is supposed to be. Um anyway, uh Alyssa raised the issue of the mitigation not being on the same lot, but I don't think she's correct. It is on the same site
and it's actually on the same lot that exists today. Um and um although the structure is entirely on proposed uh lot two um the site the limit of work
and and disruption is on all three lots. Um this is a pretty minor issue really the mitigation for this small portion of the building that's actually uh within the buffer area. Um, and you know, as
Thomas pointed out, we could put it on future lot, too. But, um, the landscape architects thinks this is a good location. Thank you. >> Thank you, Tom. Thank you, Robert. You
can stop sharing now, Tom. >> Okay. >> Melissa, >> thank you. Uh, thanks, Tom. Um, totally understand why the continuence is necessary here to hear back from Misa so we can talk about a date, you know, at the end of this year. Um, and whenever
LEC can get out there and send us the data sheets, we'll just quickly review them and save them to the file. Um, you know, it looks like a big project out there, but thankfully most of it's out of our out of our buffer zone, so it's fairly easy to review. Um, and yeah, just the staff's perspective on the
mitigation is, you know, as much as the lot is not currently subdivided, I'm assuming it will need to be for, you know, building permit purposes and and in general, I mean, even the documentation submitted has a whole separate number outlined for lot 2. It's projected to be number 270. Um, you
know, the idea is it's going to be a different lot. We understand there might be common ownership now, but that's not necessarily true in perpetuity. Um, you know, the the idea of the regulations, if you're doing work in the upland, you beef up the buffer down by the wetlands.
Um, I see that the the buffer that is particularly overlapping and creating that Bzone is on that lot three. Um, but there is zone A on lot two, there's already existing plantings and mitigation restoration down there from other projects that it could be placed
right up against. And, you know, it's 10 plants. it's not going to create that much difference. Um, the proposed area right now is not adequate. It's completely shaded in the forest and there's tons of poison ivy and herbaceous material where it's located. Um, it wasn't even staked, but I was
able to figure it out based on the gate location over there. Um, so where it's currently proposed, I definitely wouldn't agree with um to install plantings there. Um, but that's the SAP's perspective. I I understand what
you're saying. Um, I just feel like the the point of it is to be on the subject property. Um, so that's really all I have for tonight. >> Thank you, Alyssa. Fallon, anything to add?
>> Uh, I just wanted to ask uh Tom and Bob, has the subdivision been approved? >> Well, technically it's not a subdivision under zoning because we're not creating a new road. Um, that's why it's called approval not required when you divide
land that has a frontage on an existing road. Um, so the answer is that uh yes, the planning board has voted to endorse this plan. I picked it up from the
planning board today in fact. Um, so the the plan can be recorded. Um so the answer the the shorter answer would be yes. Um but it's not the lots are not divided until the plan is is recorded.
But if we um there's I don't think there's ever a condition in an order of conditions that prohibits the adjustment of lot lines or the division of property into
um uh multiple lots if it's big enough. And the order of conditions uh follows the uh the title that is it's a title incumbrance and whoever owns the property um would have to comply with it. Now in
this uh case as we've told the uh natural heritage folks there are no plans at all to develop on lot three. And as we I also told the uh reviewer um
at uh Natural Heritage, the Bernsteeen are are contemplating and have had discussions with the um Buzzards Bay Coalition to put a conservation restriction on lot three. that's really irrelevant to your consideration and and
and that obvious can't be a condition because um the intent is to uh put a conservation restriction on a buildable potentially buildable lot and therefore there's significant tax benefits. Um but
you know right now this is a a single lot that in the future will be divided into into three lots and um I think that um we Tom and I and the landscape
architects um not so much should consider the what Alyssa is saying about the uh the environmental benefits or lack thereof of of uh of planting where we're proposing because of the
conditions. Um but that's a different issue than um uh than whether we should be able to put it there uh for some uh because of lot lines. Um and again my understanding
is um that you uh conservation commission doesn't direct where the mitigation is long as long as it complies with with the requirements of the bylaw that it be in the closest to the resource area that um that's
involved and it's that resource area and the buff and zone B of that A area that is that the house is uh very slightly going into I mean again this just isn't a real big issue but um
is something we can discuss further. >> Thank you Bob. Yeah I think further discussion might be beneficial. I agree with uh Elizabeth's comment. >> Thank you. All right I'll start taking commissioners. Uh, Steve,
>> what a fascinating lot. Um, and I I remember going to the other house. So, it didn't seem like it was 10 years ago, but maybe something was done a couple years ago. I'm not sure, but this is not the first time I was on this lot. And,
uh, it's good to hear that lot three was going to I thought that would be appropriate. For some reason, I remember there being an allowed access down the old road to the old pier. >> Second continue, Tom. >> There are several
uh owners of property across the street who have an easement to access the pier, which is uh in other ownership. It's not in the Bernstein's ownership, but the people who have a right to use the pier have a right to walk across the existing
path. that won't change. And I need to emphasize that although I think it's a a good likelihood there'll be a conservation restriction. That's that's uh that has not yet been um been been settled. But conservation restriction or
not, that lot will remain subject to the right of certain a few people to walk across it. And and there was a notice filed about I think it was five years ago um by Dave Martin to do repairs on the seaw wall and the pier. So you might
have been there for that. And >> that might have been it. >> I didn't realize there were open orders and we're going to maybe conservation should get in touch with uh uh Dave Martin um for to close up get the compliance on on those two orders that
are still open. >> Yes. You knew the pier wasn't Bernstein's because it wasn't meticulous. So, um I don't have any other questions. I was just ascertaining whether that where you
were planning to put um the mitigation h and the impact on this easement. >> It's not within the easement. >> Okay. Thank you. >> We can't obstruct the easement. >> Thank you for saying that. You're right.
>> Thanks, Steve. Dan >> Dan Dan maybe >> no it just wouldn't let me unmute it for some reason. Anyways um no I don't have any further questions. I I think you guys have addressed all of the issues for for myself at this point. Thank you
>> Jim. No questions. >> Dave just one question on the diagram here. I'm looking at it. Um there's a lawn play area and a walkway. There's nothing changing there, right? I mean, uh, >> which no on the diagram, uh, south of
the of the of the house, a lawn play area is there's actually a a a curving walkway. Uh, none of that is is activity in the zone B or zone A we need to worry about. >> Is that by the construction access, Dave? >> Sorry.
>> Is that on the bottom of the plan by the construction access? >> Yeah, but it's labeled walkway. There's a lawn walkway that is in that that is on lot three. >> That's the area west of the house. >> Oh, is that west? Okay. >> Yeah. >> Is that But is that is that lot three?
Who cares? >> Some of it is >> some of it. >> But my my question is I think what you're saying is there's nothing new going on there that we have to worry about. Uh um >> Well, that's that's a proposed walkway and it it it will cross over lot three.
It doesn't go into It doesn't go into the A zone, but it's in the B zone, but it's not coverage. It's law. It's lawn. >> That's what I was getting at. >> Yeah. >> Right. Okay. That's all I had. Thank you. >> Thank you. And my questions were addressed. Um, so I believe this is
going to need to be continued. >> Yes. And I assume during that continuence staff and you guys will uh hopefully figure out the the the mitigation during that time. >> Yeah,
>> perfect. Um so when are we going to continue this? >> Well, they say MISA has 30 days. So, I don't know if three weeks is enough, but I'd rather go three weeks if there's a
hearing on that date and uh or to see if we get the um reply from Misa. >> Yeah, we can do July 15th or 22nd. And just a note, there's nothing in the public chat.
>> Thank you. >> So, the 22nd is four weeks. Well, let's do the 15th if we can. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> I I don't think that the continued hearing isn't going to take very long, >> right? >> No.
>> If we need to continue it again, we just have to, >> right? We got the uh data sheets and the hope the MISA reply and the mitigation area location. >> Oh, I will accept a motion for the board
to continue. Make a motion to continue this hearing until July 15th at the request of the applicant. Patton >> grass second. >> Got a motion and a second to continue this hearing until July 15th at the request of the applicant. Any questions?
Seeing none, I'll call the role. Steve >> I >> Dan, >> Jim, >> I >> Dave and I >> and Dy. Motion passes to continue this hearing until 7:15. >> Thanks Tom.
>> Thank you. >> Thanks Tom. >> All right. Next we have continued request for hearing under notice intent. Amanda Hunt, 227 Edgewater Drive West, Falmouth, Mass for permission to
construct additions, reconstruct a deck, install new Title 5 sewage disposal system, and install mitigation plantings. Um, it's on you, Fallon or Alyssa? >> Um, Fallon will take it. And I am promoting Jake Fricky to present his
project. >> Perfect. Amanda might have wanted to be You can check with Jake. I don't know if she wants to be promoted. >> Miss Hunt, would you like to be promoted at this time? >> Not sure. I'll keep an eye if she puts her hand up.
>> Hi, Jake. >> Hello. >> Good evening, everyone. Um, let's see. Uh, for the record, uh, my name is Jay Fricky. I'm professional land surveyor with Caven Islands Engineering, representing the homeowner for a project
on Edgewater Drive West. And Bill, with your permission, I would like to share my screen. >> Floor is yours, Jake. All right. So, uh, so by now you probably can see my screen. >> You can. >> Yes,
>> indeed. Excellent. Excellent. Uh so we have uh filed notice of intent application for this property to construct some additions and the deck to the existing dwelling as well as the construction of a new title 5 septic
system and then the associated mitigation plantings. Uh the surrounding resources on this parcel include uh the the land subject to coastal storm flowage. We've got a number of different
blood zones down by the water. It's a V14 and then we have an AE13 and then uh AE13 transitions to the X.2% and then X up by the road. The AE13 line
here is also the limit of moderate wave action. There's a coastal bank which uh traverses across the the center of the lot. um sort of along the westerly side of the shed and I straight across to the
lawn area. And then there is a a salt marsh and an adjacent BBW down by the waters of Eio Pond and then of course we have land under the ocean with within Eop itself. This this project is being proposed on a
developed parcel on the westerly side of Edgewater Drive which is located in the Sea Coast Shores neighborhood. Um there's an existing five- bedroomedroom pal lot which is currently serviced by a cesspool which is in the back portion of the lot underneath what uh is going to
be proposed as a pump chamber on this plan. Uh the proposed project includes residential additions resulting in a five- bedroomedroom single family residence and this is not an increase in flow over the current dwelling. The
construction of the additions on the north face of the residential dwelling is proposed within an existing gravel driveway. And then there is a back deck and stairs which are above uh an existing flagstone walkway and the
existing steps. There is a second story addition uh on the house as well. And there is a portion of this back deck will be um I think there was a deck associated with that as well. Um we're proposing to
remove this uh shed 97 foot shed on the south side of the property to compensate for some of these increases in lot coverage. And we're showing some dry well to capture the roof runoff in areas which are appropriate distance from the septic component. The existing cess
poolool will be removed and placed through the new title 5 septic system which is capable of handling the flow from the house. The existing cesspool as I indicated is located on the southwest corner of off the dwelling in the lawn
area. And we're going to we're proposing to install a 1600gallon septic tank and a 1000gallon pump chamber which will then pump the effluent up into a leeching field between the house and the road.
the the in compensation for all of these uh improvements to the lot, we're showing uh 648 square ft of mitigation planting which includes one proposed tree. There are a couple of trees on the lot which
uh are planned to be removed and those were previously approved for uh removal under former discussion by the client with staff. Uh, I'll now discuss some some comments uh from staff. There's a a 6 footish length
of PVC pipe in the edge of the vegetation down by the pier and we're happy to remove that pipe as it is not attached to anything. It doesn't do anything. It's just it's just laying in the edge of the lawn. uh we understand that the mitigation location that we've
proposed here is not suitable and we will be relocating it into a a different area right right now the anticipation is that the the mitigation will uh will be put in into this zone which is which is
all lawn this survey was done in the middle of the winter and at that time this was mostly pined up with a little bit of ivy But we have had a site visit with staff and we understand that that IV has now grown up and this area is no
longer acceptable for the mitigation planting and so we will be moving it out into the lawn area. We can certainly adjust the uh the limit of work uh along the northerly property line to make sure that these trees are
protected and we will be reducing the deck somewhat to maintain a consistent 24 ft buffer to this postal bank. This this corner of the deck up here is going to get uh cut off a little bit and the
whole deck is being shifted back about 6 in. We actually already have the architectural plans done for that. There's a concurrent filing going on with board of health and the plan that board of health is reviewing reflects
that modified deck but uh for various timing reasons we were not able to get that plan before you for tonight's discussion. Uh and additionally uh based on some comments from board of health uh this
both of these tanks are going to be moving right up against the edge of the deck in its new slightly reduced location to uh to maximize the separation from the top of the bank to these these two components.
We believe that with the changes that I've just identified that the project meets the performance standards uh for state and local bylaw, but we are going to obviously need a continuence in order to make these changes and we're going to request a continuence to the July 15th hearing to allow for the required
revisions. Um at this point, I'll be happy to take any questions and uh but we really do want some feedback from commission at this time. uh we don't want to wait till the hearing to get your input so that the next hearing can go very smoothly and we can just move
forward with those. >> Thanks Jake. Um Fallon or Alyssa, did you want to promote um Miss Hunt before we go forward or
Oh, it declined. Amanda, if you want to join as a panelist, you can raise your hand. We can promote you or I can try you again. Okay, I'm going to present Miss Hunt first. I do see someone else has their
hands raised, but we can go through our comments first, unless he is he involved with you, Jake? >> Yes, he is. >> Um, Mr. Joe Bournestein. >> No. >> No. Okay. So, we'll continue as we are
now. >> Hey, Amanda. Hi everyone. Thank you. I think Jake actually covered it all. So, I apologize um for coming on coming on and we will be continuing it. But I definitely appreciate um any feedback that you guys can provide and I appreciate you guys
coming out to the site this week as well. >> Thank you, Fallon. >> All right. Thank you both so much for working extensively with us to hash out a lot of lot of things and making sure
everyone is happy. Uh to start I do want to acknowledge that we have received two separate letters from an abuter and those have been dispersed to the commission. Uh we did review those comments and we believe that the project
as discussed does fit the wetlands protection act and the bylaw. So I just wanted to address that before moving forward here. Um but beyond that um we've again we've worked together to
kind of make this project work. Um, and as a whole, we believe that the septic upgrade as proposed will be very beneficial because right now on the site, there's one cess poolool very close to resource areas servicing the
property and we are getting an upgrade to a title five system. Uh, so even though there is no IIA proposed, uh, if she didn't want to, she didn't have to upgrade the septic. So overall with the leech field being as far away from its
resource areas as possible, uh I do feel like this is a very great upgrade for us. And then Jake kind of went over all of the other comments that we had and we will be in touch to look over the revised plan when available.
That's all I got. Thank you. >> Thank you, Melissa. Anything to add? >> Not at this time. Thank you. All right, I'll take commissioners questions. Dan, we'll start with you. >> Um, so just so I really understand this, so there's a this house is in a nitrogen
sensitive area, I assume, since it's in the shore. So Alyssa says no one says yes. >> Sorry, I assumed by board of health not being able to require it, it wasn't, but that was on me. >> There's no increase in low.
Yeah. Are are are bedrooms being added? >> No. The the board of health did a walk through in December and they have on file uh in in their in their records a a paper indicating that there's five bedrooms in the house currently
>> and it's staying at five. It's just they're just changing the configuration of the house. Okay. All right. So that's that's the no additional fluff. Okay. I just wanted to understand how the conclusion was drawn that there was no additional flow. That was it. Thank you. >> Thanks, Dan, Steve.
>> No, thank you. I I think we've made progress and um I don't have any further questions. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> I'm all set. >> I'm good. Uh Jake looks good. So, um I feel good about sort of a a continuence
after, but I believe we have um anything in the chat, Alyssa, for any >> Yeah, looks like Mr. Borstein has raised his hand, so I'm going to promote him as a panelist. >> Yep. >> All right. He's making his way in.
Hi, Mr. Bournestein. If you can unmute and turn on your video, I can send you some prompts to help. There's one. All right, there you go. >> You can hear me fine. >> We can. >> Thank you for your time. >> Yep.
>> Um I have some questions. I I'd like to first of all to say that the board of health has not made a decision on this. They're up in the air um as far as whether it's nitrogen or not
dite system or not a dite system needed. Okay. And if you look at the plans for the new house, you'll see that there's additional rooms that could be used as bedrooms. They're marked as other things, exercise
room and office and so forth, but actually I think they're building a sevenbedroom house and they're just calling it whatever. Please also look at the location of the tanks.
They're going to be this area is um uh what do we call it? U is in a co coastal flood zone. It's tidal pond and it's subject to uh sea level rise. So
where are we going to be in 5 years? Are these tanks going to be completely underwater? I mean, if you go over the the letter from Deborah Gilfoil, who is my wife, um there are a lot of points that need to be looked at.
>> Thank you. Did you have anything else? Um, yeah, I'd like you to send out somebody to rememeasure those bedrooms. There's one bedroom that comes out to 71 square feet. >> Yeah. So, unfortunately, that's not
within the purview of this commission. That would only be the the health agents who could do something like that >> because I I question whether it's how it was measured. >> Okay. And the other thing is uh if you approve
the project uh I'm looking for a um police detail because of the size of the street and this the size of the lot. There's not going to be any parking on the lot. And if they're bringing in any digging equipment, um they're that digging
equipment is going to be sitting on the street and extending onto the property. And the street is heavily traffked with people walking their dogs, children running, riding their bikes, and so forth. >> Okay. Yeah. For for the project here,
they're going to be required to >> keep any sort of materials, staging, or equipment within >> What was that? >> No. >> Um, yeah, they're going to be required to keep any of those materials and machinery on the property. Nothing can
be story. I'm talking about all the equipment is operating. >> Yeah. Yeah. Well, they might like leave it there overnight, you know. Um, so all that's going to have to stay on property. They they won't have permission. >> I'm not talking about whether they're going to leave it. I'm going to talking about where they're going to use it.
They're going to be on the street back hole, uh, excavator. I don't know what what they're going to be using uh to dig the um SAS. And that that's going to that that piece of equipment is going to be sitting on the street and moving on the street with
people. Let me tell you, I'm I live across the street and trying to back out of my driveway. It's a good thing I got get a fairly new car that beeps every time somebody wants to walk by with their dog because they they don't they don't stop and they don't look and you know and
listen. So there there needs to be a police date detail assigned to this as part of the project. >> Great. Thank you for your comments, Mr. Bontino. >> Thanks for your time. My name is by the
way. >> All right, Dave, you have a question. >> Uh it seems like the the concerns we just heard about uh rooms and things, that's board of health, correct, everyone? >> Yeah, it's not us. As far as far as um uh using up the road during the day, uh what who what what entity in the town
that's that's not us either, is it? >> Where would Mr. Borenstein go to to address to address that issue? >> Do we know where do we know where where he would go? >> Um I mean, I'm not quite sure on construction protocols on terms of accessing sites how frequently they can,
you know, come in and out of the street. We'd kind of have to look into that. >> We we should we should concom look into that or someone else. >> It's really up to the general contractor, I would believe. >> Yeah. I don't I don't really know what the rules are. >> That's not that also to us.
>> I was just going to help I wasn't sure where you would go on that, but anyway, it's not us. Right. Okay. >> Perfect. >> That's all I had right now. >> So, uh at the request of the applicant, they would like to continue this to July
15th. So, I'll um entertain a motion. >> I I move that we continue the July 15th Kent. >> We're at a second. >> A motion and a second to move this hearing till July 15th to continue it. Any questions? Seeing none, Dan
>> Dave, >> Jim, >> Dave and Duffy. Motion passes to continue this hearing till 7:15. Thanks, Jake. Thanks. >> Absolutely. Have a good evening. >> You, too. >> Thank you. Have a wonderful evening.
>> Thank you. >> All right. Next up, we have Grilly Revocable Trust, 20 Beach Street, found Mass for permission to construct two additions, a garage and a shed, remove a patio, rinse station, and a portion of
the house, and install mitigation plantings. A Melissa? >> Yes. I'm promoting Tom Bunker to present his continued project. >> All right. Thank you again. My name is Tom Bunker at the SS Design. And if I may, I'll share my screen, try to do it
the right way this time. Um, and then explain it to you. Thank you. Do you see the plan? >> Yes. >> Okay, good. Um,
>> can you make it a little larger? >> You can do it on your computer. >> Yeah, I can. Uh, >> there you go. >> So, yeah, we are here. uh was it two or three weeks ago? Um some issues about uh
some some uh mitigation area and things. So I'll just quickly run through the uh changes that we made. Um, so I talked with uh Alyssa and brought her a couple of plans and this this area first there's an area up in here with
leaf piles and all and this will be cleaned out and uh reveated up in this area. So where I said last time it added this note remove the leaf pile and reveate. Um, so this will be all a continuous, you know, mitigation area
through here. That's one of them. The disturbed area, the staff noted a disturbed area here with lacking natural vegetation. Um, and so that is and it's partly on
the neighbors. Unfortunately, I didn't locate it, but it's it's found in here. And it's the uh restore the disturbed area with native shrubs uh on the neighbors property also right through through here. Um
there was some talk about the the uh the increase in the the the uh the expansion of this driveway area here. And so I I just made a little
detail. Also in uh in 2015, there was a timber strip going timber edging on the driveway across this way. And so that that was removed after the previous uh notice of intent we did and it was made
made wider that way. Um but we had the um rather than we asked if we could or Alyssa offered that we could put um um mitigation for this on the lot or or
restoration shrubs on the lot rather than mi rather than doing here because he he he obviously needs some place to be able turn around a car rather than back back out turn into the back into the neighbor's driveway.
So, we're taking this area which is uh oops, sorry, irregular shaped and squaring it off to be 10 ft wide and 8 feet back. So, these dots are the proposed mitigation that's
going in there anyway. And so this this triangular area will be allowed to be made into a gravel this parking area three or rather a turning area. Six square ft here in this triangle in exchange for this square ft here which
would be restored and then uh three square ft um of of planting going in in the streetway in the the roadway. So that leaves uh 42 square feet
uh here and then 42 square feet uh was actually 40 45 it's 45 square ft added into the mitigation uh planting. And so we just
cut this corner a little more, adding that. So we have another 45 square ft of shrubs on the property here. Um the oak tree, which we discussed as
possibly staying, uh Mr. really decided that uh rather than risk the damage and all, he would take that down now and then plant a new one roughly in the same location, which Alyssa said this one and this tree, which is a replacement for a
tree, uh, and this one, because there's so many trees on the lot, Alyssa said that these could be understory trees, not full-size oak trees or whatever, and that the staff will help uh determine location and species for three trees
here, here, and here part of it. And then uh from the previous uh hearing she mentioned a list of that is mentioned that there were trees um previously removed. That's this one
right here and a tree right here. And she said it'd be okay if they can allow to be removed without the need for replacement. And so I'm just pointing out that the two trees that we're
talking about, one here and one within the proposed garage are those trees. Um, and then also Mr. Girly just wanted to make sure that he could um do shingling and possibly obviously where he's putting this on, he'll do the shingling, but on the main house, he might also
like to replace some windows um and siding around the house so long as the order of conditions remains open. Uh, so that's that's what we've changes we've made and I think I addressed the uh commission comments. We'll take your
questions. >> Thank you, Tom. Melissa. >> Yes. Um, thanks Tom. I think everything's been accounted for. We'll probably just have a special condition that we get that about our permission prior to, you know, work beginning. U but it'll give them some time to kind of
reach out and um get that going. Fallon, anything to add? >> Nothing to add. Thank you. Thanks, Tom. >> All right. I'll take commissioners questions or comments. Dave, >> I can't say I really understand what's
going down on both sides of the driveway there, but if staff is okay with it, I'm okay with it. Sounds like they are okay with it. So, I have nothing else. Jim, >> I've got nothing. M, Mr. Chairman, >> Steve, no questions, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Dan.
You're muted. >> Yeah. No, no questions. Thank you. >> And I don't either. Uh, thanks for working with staff, Tom. Um, any questions in the chat function, Melissa? >> Nothing in the public chat and no hands
raised. >> Excellent. Much a pleasure. >> Mr. Chairman, I think we should uh issue an order of conditions. >> Close the hearing. >> Close the hearing. I'm ready to issue order conditions. I might >> I know you are next week.
>> As soon as we know that. >> Yes. >> He may retire me. >> He forgets who he's dealing with. >> Matt McGrath second. >> Yeah. Motion a second to close the hearing and take it on revisement. Any questions? Seeing none, Dave.
>> Can I? Jim >> Rath I >> Steve >> Bratton I >> Dan >> Walsh I >> and Duffy I motion passes to close the hearing and take it under advisement. >> Thank you for your time Tom. >> Yeah. Thank you for listening and we see
you in a week or two. >> Night Tom. >> Good night. >> All right. We have James Po and Robin Shama, 65 Walker Street, Felmouth, Mass, for permission to raise an existing single family dwelling, construct a new
single family dwelling with deck, porches, and attached garage, install a new Title 5 sewage disposal system, and install mitigation and restoration plantings. Alyssa, >> yes, I have promoted Zach Bazinski from Bracken Engineering to present his
continued project. Hi, Zach. >> Good evening. Good evening, commission members. Uh, for the record, Zach Basinski, professional engineer, Bracken Engineering. I'm going to share my screen at this time. You're >> all set. >> Thank you. >> So, as mentioned, we're here this
evening on behalf of the applicants. Uh, this project was continued so that we could submit an updated plan to address some staff comments uh that was submitted um week ago to staff. So again, just to recap, per project, um consists of the raise or demoing of an
existing two-bedroom house. Uh existing house was built in 1966. It's on a 15,000 square ft lot. Uh this is just east of town hall on Walker Street. Uh resource areas on or near the lot are in
IVW. Uh wetlands were flagged by ECR. Uh we do did reach out to them today, Alyssa. We will be submitting the data logs to you. So you will see that from uh Cam Larson and Brad Holmes. Um again project consists of raising the existing
structure building a new title five compliant structure. um project results in an increase in 290 square ft in the zone A towards the IVW and then a net decrease in the zone B um of 359 square
ft for a total reduction of structure and impervious coverage of 64 square ft on the lot. Uh project is proposed to be um serviced by an on-site title 5 septic system. This is a new innovative alternative septic system. Uh we have
submitted a variance application to the board of health which is uh being subject to be heard on July 6th. We're in front of the board. Um on the proposed plans uh we have reduced the size of the septic or the proposed bedrooms in the house uh currently back
down to a two-bedroom. Architect is working on redesigning the floor plans. Um it is our intent to do go in front of the conser uh sorry the board of health to request the three-bedroom septic. If they do agree and approve to that, we would be back in front of this commission if they did approve the
project tonight uh to amend that. But uh we are looking for approval of staff and the commission feels they have enough information. Uh we did receive some additional staff comments uh for the project. Um Alyssa, this little area on the plan uh was a drafting. It is the
existing hedro uh on the existing condition side that's proposed to be kept. And then there are a couple little cluster areas of trees up in the back corner here uh that we do anticipate would come down. Our intent here is to
work with staff if approved, put in a finalized planting plan and tree plan uh with staff. If they feel that that needs to be brought back in front of the board, we would come back um under construction and have that final plan uh reviewed by the commission if staff
feels that needs to happen. And the last staff comment was around understanding there was a couple of wing walls off of the proposed building. Uh this is to accommodate the um new foundation system being in the flood plane. So we're keeping the existing grades stepping
down so we can have access into the structure. And then this side here is just a two-ft um landscape wall so we can get the flood vents to meet the building code and flood um flood plane requirements for the structure. So overall um result of the project would
result in a new flood compliant structure energy efficient structure uh would have a new IIA septic system on it which would reduce the overall nitrogen loading by 52% on the property and then would also
again reduce the impervious uh cover and structure area on the lot. And I will turn it back over to questions and comments. Thanks, Zach. Melissa, >> thanks, Zach. Um, yeah, I don't think
you need to come back before the commission. We can sort of just condition a revised plan for those um trees and grading questions. Um, but I think everything's been answered for tonight. >> You found anything to add?
>> Nothing to add. Thank you. >> You're welcome. All right. I will take commissioner's comments and questions. Jim, >> I have no questions. Steve, >> no questions. >> Dan, no. >> A lot of good improvements. No, no questions.
>> Dave, >> just one quickie. Zack, last time we saw you, how many bedrooms were in the plan? >> Uh, we had a threebedroom before, so we're dropped it back down to two for the approval on this. So, if we don't get through Yep.
>> That's all I have. Thank you. >> And I got nothing. Uh, no questions. Um, anything in the chat in the audience, Alyssa? >> Nothing in the chat. No hands raised. >> All right.
Um, take a motion. >> I'll make a motion to close the hearing and take this under advisement. >> 10 seconds. >> A motion and a second to close the hearing and take it under advisement.
Any questions? Seeing none, Jim >> McGrath I >> Steve >> I >> Dan >> Walshy >> Dave >> Kenti >> and Duffy. Motion passes to close the hearing and take it on advisement. Thank you for your time Zach. >> Thanks everyone. Steve, pleasure to work
with you. Hopefully this isn't your last meeting. >> Thanks Zach. >> All righty. Take care everyone. >> All right. Next we have continued hearings under an enforcement order. Um number one we got Jane Sahesian 21 Davis
neck roadmouth mass unprimmitted vegetation removal within conservation jurisdiction. Melissa >> yes thank you. In conversation with Mr. Zahesian he would like to request a continuence until July 22nd. We did go
out there and um GPS a potential planting area. We just have to refine that a bit more. >> Okay. So Alyssa, how's that work with the schedule from the court? >> I don't know.
>> I thought that they court earlier they wanted to see >> I think it got pushed. Um I don't think they actually met at that at that um >> at that time. I don't know why. Um I
just don't believe that happened. I don't know the date got pushed to, but I'm sure that they could um continue that. >> What's going to happen between now and 7:22? >> Um so basically Jen and I went out there with our seasonal intern who has a GPS
logger. Um because the court thought that a survey wasn't necessary, um we have been trying to be pseudo surveyors and flag out a potential planting area. Um
based on our use of aerial photos and GIS, we determined that the area of clearing was approximately 1900 square ft. We thought we achieved that with our flags, but we were short about 400 square f feet. So, we have to go out and rework it a bit.
Um, and Mr. Seah would like to move forward once something is a bit more concrete. >> Okay. Thank you. >> I'll entertain a motion to continue. >> I move, Ken, that we uh we continue until July 22nd.
>> Okay. >> Second. Got a motion and a second to continue this hearing until July 22nd. Any questions? Seeing none, Dave >> Kai, >> Jim, >> I >> Steve, >> Dan >> Walsh,
>> and Duffy. I motion passes to continue this until July 22nd. Next, Charles and Maria Clark, 41 Davis Neck Road found with mass unpermitted clearing and expansion of hard hardscape within conservation jurisdiction. What's that?
>> Uh, so staff is recommending that we continue this out. I did reach out to the um surveyor who is working on this project. They have got their final notes and will be filing with us soon. Um there was no particular date that was
brought up, but I figured we could push this to the 22nd, a full month, and we should have the notice by then. >> All right. Any questions on this? There's a recommendation of staff. I move this continue this until the 22nd
of July. >> Grant second. >> Motion a second to continue this until the 22nd July. Any questions? >> Yeah, just and they're filing a notice of intent. What are they going to file between before then?
>> Um, they are planning to voluntarily submit a notice of intent to remedy the unpermitted activity on the site. >> Thank you. All right. Dave, >> I >> Jim McGrath,
>> Steve and I, >> Dan >> Walsh, >> Dan Duffy. I motion passes to continue this until July 22nd. Next, we have vote orders of conditions. First, we got Michael Tanios, 86
Edgewater Drive, East Falmouth, Massachusetts. Alyssa. >> Yes. Um, so this is a small project. They are constructing a partial second story and reworking the roof in that
area. Couple additions and a porch. Um, the little shell walkway in that area be removed. So will the um wraparound deck just sort of make that um more of a proper entry over there. Um, we didn't
really have concerns with the project. Uh we've had a couple applications and violations on the property in the past. So when I reviewed the cycle dead plantings that should be replaced. Um
but really no other comments. >> All right. Any questions? >> No. Move that we issue order. Uh, you approved the order conditions. Just disc just close the hearings. Is that what we do now? >> Yeah.
>> Uh, >> to issue an order of conditions. >> I saw, >> I'm ready, coach. >> Steve wants to do these, doesn't he? >> Issue an order of conditions as discussed. P. >> There we go. >> Second.
>> All right. We have a motion and a second to issue an order of conditions as discussed. Any questions? Seeing none, I will call the role. Dave >> Kai, >> Jim >> McGrath I >> Steve I >> Dan
>> Alai >> Duffy I motion to issue an order of conditions as discussed has passed. Next Jane Cwley Culinan and Stephen R. Stella trustees Jane Crowley Culinary
discretionary trust 39 Pine Bank Road Falmouth Mass. Melissa, >> yes, this is a raisin rebuild with a septic upgrade. Um, minor work on the retaining walls just per the new construction.
Um, this was definitely an odd site, you know, just considering it looks like a house in a dune. Um, so we do need uh Bracken to slightly readjust their delineation of that. They did send in a
revised plan, but it it's still not quite how we discussed. Um, so we can certainly just um require that as a condition to tweak the buffer right there. And because of the septic upgrade, several
small cedars will be coming down. They were originally planted when the house was constructed about 101 15 years ago. So, we will need to work with them to replant a couple more trees on the property. Um,
I would like for them to rename the mitigation area. It's more of a restoration/voluntary planting area just so there's no confusion in the future. But other than that, I don't believe there were any major concerns.
>> Okay, any questions? Seeing none, it's your chance. Steve, >> no questions. >> No questions. >> I'd like to issue uh order of conditions as discussed. >> Second.
>> We got a motion in a second to issue an order of conditions as discussed. Dave >> Jim >> McGrath I >> Dan >> Walsh. Steve >> Ben I >> and Duffy motion passes to issue an
order conditions as discussed. All right. Well, that's it. That's everything on the agenda. So, I will um accept the final motion. >> Mr. Chairman, is this is this Mr. Patton's last Steve's last meeting? We
do not know that if that's officially >> I figured it was since Jen checked out and wasn't here. >> I thought for sure it was over because of that, but you know. >> So technically Steve's term will be up at the end of the month. However, um if
you would like, you may remain as a holdover until we have an applicant um promoted by the select board to fill a full-time member position. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So you don't have to go until you're kicked off. >> That's what I wanted to. >> You're in the wings if you would like
to. >> I want to go to the selectman's meeting, too. Make sure these candidates are okay. >> Don't you don't vote against me. I'm up. You know, they'll probably they'll probably come vote against me. >> Well, that's what it takes. >> I just want to know when we should make
our emotional goodbyes in a meeting. That's what I wanted to know. >> There you go. I'll make the motion to adjurnn. We'll put that on. Congrat. >> Thank you, gentlemen. You're welcome. All right. >> And lovely ladies >> I
>> and Duffy eye. Motion to adjourn is passed. Thank you all.