Heat. Heat. This is Courtney Bird. I'm the vice chair of the conservation commission and I'm temporarily hosting the meeting today, Wednesday the se 17th or 16th >> 17th
>> 17th of December 2025. Um, and before we start the meeting, I would like to personally thank um, uh, Ross Robbins for his work as chair, and I'm uh, quite honestly very disappointed
that he stepped down. I think that the town and the conservation commission loses a lot by his uh, being here and I have large temporary feet uh, shoes to fill. So anyway, I am the vice chair and I'm
calling this meeting to order. Um before I start, I want want to note it for the record that uh all of our members are present. that includes Steve Patton, Jim McGrath, Ron Bowman, Ron
Driscoll, Bill Duffy, David Kent, and we also have our staff, um, Alyssa Burggeron, and I guess she I guess that she's the only one other than um I might missing um Kristen.
>> You're missing Jen Lincoln, but thank you, Court. >> Yeah. And other than that, no problem. >> Yeah, other than that, we can go on. who's recording all of this stuff. So anyway, um now there are some this is an open meeting of the Falmouth Conservation
Commission and it's being conducted via Zoom and also being browed on cable channel 15 and streamed online at fctv.org. For those who want to join view the meeting but do not want to participate, we suggest viewing on FCTV.
Um, members of the public who want to make comments or ask questions during the meeting may join the meeting as Zoom attendees, which allows you to submit written comments and questions via the chat function and also to see and hear
the meeting in real time. The link and the instructions for joining the meeting are listed in the agenda posting and can be found at www.falmouthmass.gov. Conservation FCTV will also be posting information on how to access Zoom
meetings during the broadcast of this meeting. This meeting is being recorded. So be a aware that you as a panelist and uh you as a participant can be seen and heard and therefore if you don't want to be um
heard mute your microphone and if you're on camera, make sure you're properly dressed. Okay. So on that score, um let's get to the basic ground rules. Before turning to the first item on the agenda, I want to review some basic
ground rules of orderly conduct of our business and to ensure accurate meeting minutes. As chair, I will introduce each speaker on the agenda. Please remember to unmute your microphone and to speak clearly. When done, please remute
yourself. Please do not speak unless you're in you are recognized by the chair. If you as a me meeting meeting attendee want to ask a question or make a comment, please use the chat function.
Um, after each presentation, the chair will ask staff members for questions or comments, and the chair will then ask the commission to make their comments. After the presentation and staff and commissioner discussions,
the chair will ask a staff member to read any questions or comments typed into the Zoom chat function by members of the public. If someone wants to speak uh as a um uh in the meeting, please
notify via the chat function and you will be made a participant. Ha, have your um uh sound enabled and your video enabled. We want to be able to see you. Um all votes for this remote
meeting will be taken by roll call. I will call out the name of each member and ask you to repeat your last name before starting your vote. So on that score, the next step is that
um on the agenda and let me get the agenda out. Um hold on. Having to shift gears from one meeting to the next is um uh a major operation. And let me find
the agenda. What's Do we have minutes on the agenda, Jen? I'm just >> No, we do not, Courtney. >> Okay. I'm just I'm just trying to get Yeah, I have the agenda. Okay. Sorry this for the fumbling around, but I've shifted gear very quick. Okay. So, the
first um first thing on the agenda is request for continuences. Uh, we have a request for um, uh, oh, I know one thing I have to do before we start. We have an al because of Russ
stepping down, I need to elevate, uh, Rob Bowman to be, uh, a full-time member of the chair. So, uh, you have gone from an alternate to a full-time member. What a privilege it is to have you with us, Rob. >> Okay, >> welcome, Ron.
So, and no call for Rob. Okay, >> this means worth it already. >> All right, so here we go. So, the first thing is we have a request for continuence under a notice of intent. Brian Mcofflin 70 Falmouth Pier 37 Inc.
110 Scranton Avenue Falmouth Mass for permission to replace and relocate at the bulkhead remove a portion of filled wetlands and or tidelands and expand the existing dock system. Uh Jen,
>> yes, Mr. Chairman, the applicant is requesting a continuence until January 21st. >> Okay. Do we have a any comments on that? And the reason the reason for that request >> uh we're still waiting for revised plans.
>> Okay. Any questions or comments? I need a motion to >> fiscal. So moved continue to the 21st. >> We have a motion and a second uh to continue this to the 21st of January 2026. >> Um okay. I'm going to call second.
>> Thank you. >> Welcome. >> Okay. I'm going to call a roll. Steve, you're going to unmute yourself. Steve, you're >> you're muted. Wave your hand and up and down.
>> Okay, I got it. I got it. >> Okay. >> Hi, Patton. I >> Okay, Steve. >> Jim. Jim McGrath. >> McGrath. I >> And Ron Bowman. >> Bowman. I >> And Ron Driscoll >> Driscoll I. and Bill Duffy
>> Duffy I >> and David Kent >> Kent Eye >> and Bird Eye. All right. Next, uh Falmouth Condominium uh Falmouth condominium owners care of uh Rudy Hunter, Falmouth Drive across
from units 278 and 292 through 292, Falmouth, Mass. permission to raise and regrade the roadway and install drainage improvements. Uh Jen, >> yes, Mr. Chairman, the applicant is
requesting a continuence until January 14th. They're still doing plan revisions. >> Okay. Do we have a motion? >> Fiscal so moved. >> Okay. >> 20 to the 14th. >> Okay. We have a motion and a second uh
to continue this hearing until the 14th of January. Uh and I'll start with uh Steve >> abstain. Patton abstain. >> Okay. Jim McGrath. >> McGrath. I >> Ron Bowman >> Bowman I. >> Ron Driscoll
>> Driscoll I. >> Bill Duffy >> Duffy I. >> And David Kent >> Kent I. >> And Bird Eye. Okay. Next we have request for a continuation for a certificate of
compliance. Tim Timothy Lem trustee RNG Realy Trust 1209 East Falmouth Highway East Mass request for partial certificate of compliance for Mass D25-4524.
Yeah. So Jen, >> yes, Mr. Mr. Chairman, the applicant requesting a continuence until January 14th. >> Okay. Do we have a motion? >> McGrath. So move >> second. >> Okay. Have a motion and a second to
continue uh this um request for continue for a certificate uh until the 14th of January 2026. Uh Steve Patton. >> Patton I >> and Bill Jim McGrath.
>> McGrath. I >> and Ron Bowman. >> Bowman. I >> and Ron Driscoll. >> Driscoll. I >> And Bill Duffy. >> Duffy. I >> And David Kent. >> Kent. I >> And Courtney Bird. I. Okay. Moving
along. Next is um uh request for a continuence under an enforcement order. David and Marcy Barnes 38 Squid Squib Knocket Drive Falmouth Mass. unpermitted construction of retaining walls, steps,
and a patio, replacement of decking, and alteration of a coastal bank. Um, Jen, >> yes, Mr. Chairman, the applica, the excuse me, the property owner is requesting a continuence until January
21st. They are they are they are in the process of getting a site plan done. >> Okay. Do we have a motion? >> Duffy. So moved >> second. >> And we had a second. Who was the second?
>> Okay, we have a motion and a second uh to continue this uh enforcement or a hearing until the 21st of uh January 19, 2026. All right. Uh Steve Pattern, >> Patton I
>> and Jim McGrath >> McGrath I >> and Ron Bowman >> Bowman I >> and Ron Driscoll >> Driscoll I >> and Bill Duffy >> Duffy I >> and David Kent >> Kent I >> and Bird I. Very good. We're excellent.
Okay. Next. A request for determination of applicability. Under request for uh let me see. Uh, under request for determination of applicability, an RDA, the applicant is asking the conservation commission to decide if the
provisions of the MA Massachusetts wetlands 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 and
therefore it can proceed. A positive determination is that the provisions in the act or bylaw do apply. Therefore, the applicant will have to submit an orders of intent for the project if he or she wants to go forward. In simplest
terms, a no means yes. Okay. So first request for determination of applicability is the town of Falmouth highway department care of Jim Grady the Shining Sea Bikeway Falmouth Mass for
permission to repave the bike path within the existing footprint and Alyssa I think you're in charge of these >> I am. Staff recommends a negative three under the state and a negative two under the bylaw. Resource area boundaries are not confirmed. >> Driscoll so moved that second. Okay, we
have a motion in a second uh to approve the this this request for applicability. And I'll start with Steve Patton. >> Patton I >> and Jim McGrath >> McGrath I >> and Ron Bowman >> Bowman I >> and Ron Driscoll
>> Driscoll I. >> And Bill Duffy >> Duffy I >> and David Kent >> Kent I. >> And Courtney Bird. Yeah, it says I too. Okay, next. Um we have um David K and Maryanne
Maderos 50 Pondlet Place Falmouth Mass permission to install restoration plannings plantings and conduct invasive species management. Alyssa >> staff recommends a negative three under the state and a negative two under the
bylaw. Resource area boundaries are not confirmed. >> Okay. >> Motion moved >> and second. Okay, >> Mr. Chairman, I'd just like to make one correction. There has been a revised plan. That plan does not include invasive species management. So, the
negative -2 and negative3 are just for restoration plantings. >> All right. Um, do we need to amend that? >> No, I'm just clarifying it for you. >> Okay. All right. So, with that
clarification, I'll ask for the vote. Um Steve >> Patton I >> and Jim McGrath >> McGrath I >> and Ron Bowman >> Bowman I >> Ron Driscoll >> Driscoll I >> Bill Duffy >> Duffy I >> David Kent
>> Kent Eye >> and Courtney Bird eye. Okay next um let's see where are we? Oh, Si and Jonathan Tower 66 Crawl Road, Falmouth, Mass permission to remove 10 trees and
conduct minor invasive species management. Alyssa >> staff recommends a negative three under the state and a negative -2 under the bylaw. Resource area boundaries are not confirmed. >> Okay, so >> move patent second. We have a motion and
a second to approve this or issue a um so Steve >> and I >> and Jim McGrath >> McGrath I >> and Ron Bowman >> Bowman I >> and Ron Driscoll >> Driscoll I >> and Bill Duffy >> Duffy I
>> and David Kent >> Kent I >> and Dave and Courtney Bird I. Okay, motion carried. Moving on. Um, next continued request for a determination of applicability. Andrea Monontton,
103 Racing Beach Avenue, Falmouth, Mass. Permission to install mitigation and restoration plannings in accordance with Mass D25-3247. Uh, Alyssa >> staff recommends a negative three under the state and a negative two under the bylaw. Resource area boundaries are not
confirmed. >> We have a motion. >> Some moved and second. >> Okay, we have a motion and a second to approve uh this this um RDA. Uh Steve Patton. >> Patton I
>> and Jim McGrath. >> McGrath I >> and Ron Bowman. >> Bowman I. >> And Ron Driscoll. >> Driscoll I. and Bill Duffy. >> Duffy eye. >> And David Kent >> and I >> and finally Courtney Birdie. Okay, moving on.
Next continued request. Oh, I'm sorry. We've done that. Um, now we're into requests for a hearing under a notice of intent. All hearings of the Falmouth Conservation Commission are held simultaneously under the authority of
the Massachusetts Wetland Protection Act and the Falmouth Wetlands bylaw. Although a single decision of the commission is issued, it represents a separate decision under each authority. Okay. So, uh, this is a new hearing and
so everybody's on the, um, quorum and this is C, uh, CH Newton Builders, 52 Oyster Shell Lane, East Falmouth, Mass permission to enlarge the existing deck and install mitigation associated
mitigation. It says here, however, they have requested to continue this. So, um, Jen, would you please? >> Yes, Mr. Chairman. the applicants requesting a continuance until January 14th. There might need to be some plan changes. >> Okay. >> We'll be meeting with the applicant's
representative shortly. >> And so, can we have a motion to continue this? >> A motion. Motion to continue hearing at the applicant's uh request to the 14th of January 26. Driscoll. >> Okay. >> Bowman. Second. >> All right. We have a motion and a second
to continue this meeting, I'm sorry, this hearing until the 14th of January, 2026. Um, Patton >> Patton I >> and Jim McGrath,
>> you got unmute yourself. >> McGrath, I >> I did read your lips and it but I just needed to confirm because somehow that doesn't come through on the uh video. All right. Ron Bowman. >> Bowman. I >> And Ron Driscoll.
>> Driscoll. I >> And Bill Duffy. >> Duffy. I >> and David Kent. >> Kent. I. >> And finally, Courtney Bird. I. Okay. Next. We have continued requests for a hearing under a notice of intent. And
this one has been is supposed to be continued as well. Brian McGofflin, Pier 37, Inc. 110 uh Scranton Avenue, Falmouth, Mass. permission to replace and relocate the bulkhead and remove a portion of Phil Tidelands and expand an
existing dock system. >> Courtney, we continued this to January 21st. >> Okay. It's a continuation of January 21st, >> correct? >> Yeah, I think we already voted this. I'm sorry. >> Yes, we did. >> All right. My apologies. I'm getting
old. Moving on. Next is um Falmouthport condominiums and that as well has been continued. So >> correct to January 14th >> January 14th and by the way we are now into continued hearings under a notice
of intent. So the next one after uh Mlaplan is um Palmouth board condominiums and they uh owners and so forth. They have that as a hearing has been continued as
well. So moving on next is Peter and Jennifer Heron 436 Aapescott Road Falmouth Mass to permission to install a vinyl sheet pile. So the quorum is please
I need the quorum. >> So the quorum is everyone except you Courtney. >> All right. So I'm other than being the chair I have no voting function and I can't bother to bug the uh applicants. So you're in luck, Jake. Um
>> good. >> All right. Jake, do you have a question? Jen, I >> Nope. I just wanted to introduce Jake Fricky from Capen Islands Engineering to present his continued project. Good evening, Jake. >> Good evening everyone. Uh for the
record, uh my name is Jake Fricky. I'm professional land surveyor with Caven Islands Engineering and I'm representing Peter Herren for this project on Aapesca Road. This is, as Courtney indicated, a continued hearing for notice of intent application to repair an existing bulkhead. And with your permission, Courtney, I would like to share my
screen. >> You have my permission. Thank you sir. Okay. So, uh you should now all be able to see this. Um and the uh and I will do
my best to keep this brief as we have already reviewed uh reviewed this but for for everyone's benefit I will quickly go through it again. Um this uh this project is to repair a a small portion of bulkhead in uh in this ex in
this vicinity. It is a a timber bulkhead which uh is dilapidated and uh and we're proposing to replace it with vinyl in front of it. Uh there is a salt marsh which is behind the bulkhead and uh the
the bulkhead is actually protecting and promoting the salt marsh in this area. And so we're um we're proposing to do this work both to uh replace the bulkhead to protect the client's uh interests but uh also in order to uh to
protect that salt marsh from further erosion. As the bulkhead has started to fail, it is uh the salt marsh is starting to erode on this side over by the pier. Um the uh let's see um the there was one uh
there was some the reasons that this was continued is that it didn't have a D file number which it now has and we were waiting for DMF comments. Uh we have received a D file number and we have received DMF comments and uh the staff
questions uh were as sort of related to as follows. uh what were the the alternatives for this? So the alternatives that we considered were to a do nothing um which would not protect the wetlands and uh and as the structure continues to deteriorate it would expose
the salt marsh and expose this uh this area here to further erosion. Uh option B would be a full removal and replacement of the bulkhead and we did not choose that uh as we felt it would do more harm than good to the existing
salt marsh there to actually remove all of that existing bulkhead and then replace it with vinyl rather than what we're proposing to do which is to drive the new vinyl directly in front of the bulkhead. And option three was the project as proposed uh which protects
the salt marsh as best as we can u while also achieving the property owner's goals of protecting their land and u and cleaning up of a a dilapidated situation. Um DMF comments uh were received today which indicate that there's to be no storage materials or
construction allowed on the salt marsh itself which is expected and um we we agree with that. uh staff had previously indicated that uh no CCA treated materials were to be used uh and we've noted on our plan that no leeching wood
preservative would be used and um and then uh the the final former comment was um uh you know what is the benefit of this and what would happen uh to the salt marsh uh if the bulkhead was removed and we we believe the salt marsh would erode
away um as there's no salt marsh to the north of the the dock. here in this this bulkhead is is promoting a nice piece of salt marsh here. So, um with with now all of our ducks in a row with D file number and DMF comments, we believe we
demonstrated the project complies with found wetland regulations. And at this point, I'll stop sharing my screen so we can uh have any questions. >> Okay, we'll start with uh Thank you. >> One one thing, Court. Sorry. >> Yeah, go ahead.
>> Sorry. Um, Jake, can you again go DMF had a comment about taking it out and replacing it in kind instead of putting the sheet pile in front? Is that possible? And if you already addressed it, I was jotting something down, so I apologize.
>> Sorry. Uh, yeah. So, so the, uh, that was one of our options in our alternative analysis, which I touched upon. Our concern with the removable and replacement is that it will uh substantially damage the salt marsh to
remove that existing bulkhead because the the salt marsh is growing right up to it. And so by driving right in front of it, we're leaving the whole saw marsh intact versus if we if we pulled it away, there would be uh substantial degradation to the salt marsh.
>> So you're leaving the wooden structure in place. You're just putting the sheet pile in front of it. >> That's right. We're going to leave the wood and and then drive the sheet pile in front of it. And then the wood will be trimmed off flush with grade and then the voids in the >> uh in the in the new vinyl will be
filled with compatible sand and it'll probably just grow all in there. >> Okay. Thank you. Sorry about that. Um and did you touch upon you might uh we're going to put a time of year restriction on to comply with the um recommendations from DMF? Yes, they they
they uh the we expected a time of year restriction. There is not a specific time of year noted in the DMF comments. Um but we did expect that there would be some uh some expectation of a time of
year restriction and uh and we would we would like to work with staff to uh to get that limit of work in as as quickly as possible before the time of year restriction comes into place. so that the work could be done sometime later in the winter as uh as the contractor has
time allowed. >> Okay. >> Uh >> yeah, it'll be January through like midmay, but we can work with you to get that um boom in first. >> Yeah. >> Okay, that's fine. That's all I have, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. >> Okay. Are you all set, Jen?
>> Yes. >> Okay. Alyssa, do you have any comments? >> No comments. Thank you. >> Okay. And uh I will move to to uh uh start with David Kent. Do you have anything that you'd like to ask? >> Met. Thanks.
>> And Bill Duffy? >> No, I'm good with this as it is as long as um the staff is agreeable and they're going to work with uh Jake and those people. I'm I'm fine with it. Thanks. >> Okay. And Ron Driscoll. >> Yeah, just one question. Now Jake, do
you think the salt marsh is going to grow towards the the the deck towards the pier when all this is uh fixed in uh and there's no holes? The water will stop going in through the through the wall, the timber wall. You think the salt marsh might expand a little? I
wouldn't be surprised if it did. um that that timber wall closest to the dock is definitely the some of the worst section and um and it seems like it's eroding on that end where water is is sort of
squirting between the planks. >> Okay. All right. >> All right. Thanks. That's all. That's all, Mr. Chairman. I'm done. >> Okay. Uh Ron Bowman, you have >> no comment, sir. Uh >> and Jim McGrath, >> no questions, Mr. Kevin.
>> Okay, Steve. >> No questions, Mr. Chairman. >> Okay, so normally I try to award coal to go into somebody's stocking at Christmas time. You don't get the coal. It's a
good presentation. Thank you. >> Well, thank you, Courtney. You have two more chances to give me the coal. So, uh, >> don't encourage him. >> Good. All right. We get more wax at you. I make a motion to close the hearing and take it under adisement. Dristle. >> Do we have a second?
>> Pullman. Second. >> Okay, we have a motion and a second to close the hearing. So, I'll start with Steve Patton. >> Patton I. >> Jim McGrath. >> McGrath. I >> and Ron Bowman. >> Bowman. I >> Ron Driscoll I.
>> Driscoll I. You voted. Okay. Bill Duffy. >> Duffy. I. >> David Kent. >> Kent I. >> And Bird I. The meeting is closed. The hearing is closed. Thank you very much. All right, moving along. Uh, next one is
Marissa Weiss and David Freriedman, 26 Buzzards Bay Avenue, Falmouth, Mass. for permission to construct an addition and install mitigation plannings. Again, as a continued hearing, I will ask for the quorum. >> Everyone but you.
>> What's that? >> It's everyone but you, Court. >> Everybody but me. I don't know. I'm beginning to get a complex. All right. So, um, uh, we'll Are you on, Jake? Do I have another whack at you? Okay, >> that's it. Yeah, you get another chance
right now. >> All right, >> Mr. Mr. Chairman Jake Fricky, Capan Islands Engineering to present his continued project. >> All right, go ahead. You're on, Jake. >> All right. Excellent. So, good evening. For the record, my name is Jake Fricky. I'm professional land surveyor with Caven Islands Engineering representing
Marissa Weiss and David Freriedman for a project on Buzzards Bay Avenue. This is a continuation of a hearing from December 3rd to review a notice of intent application to construct a small addition in the associated mitigation plantings. And with your permission, Courtney, I would like to share my screen.
>> You have your per my permission. >> Thank you, sir. Okay. So, you should all now be able to see my plan here. Uh, similar to the the last program, I will uh do my best to uh
to move through this quickly. I um I think I've touched on most of this before. Uh the what has come uh since the last plan I will I will focus on. Um so, this is this is an addition on the
northerly side of the house here. uh and uh the associated mitigation planting uh at the the staff comments in our last uh round indicated that there was an AC pad
here and uh AC a HVAC platform here which had been installed without conservation uh permitting. uh and they were done while some interior work was being done to the house and uh and also there was a question about the location of this
hedge and so those those items are shown and we are now also showing sufficient mitigation planting to account for the increases in impervious in the A and B
related to these HVAC units. Um that mitigation planting is uh is a combination of a expansion of the former area here as well as a small piece here. Uh after visiting the site with staff,
we determined that uh there's a there's a stand of very mature privet in this pink area here, which would likely uh provide far too much shade on this northerly piece of mitigation for appropriate growth. And so it was
decided that uh that mature privet would be removed and replaced with native shrubs as part of this planting. the this is just a remove and replace. We're not counting this area for mitigation. It's just uh to allow the the new plants
to have more sunlight. These privets are at least 10 ft tall and um and are are really crowding the area substantially. By taking them out and having this all be one nice contiguous planting, I think that the the whole area will be much
happier and healthier. Um the uh the the staff comments um uh that we received on the 16th uh are really in relation to the clearing outside of the uh limit of work, the 1995 limit of
work, which runs along uh this our current limit of work and then extends a little bit to the south here. Uh and the as discussed before, the client does indeed have some raspberries that are outside of this limit of work. Um, and beyond that, the bank is overgrown with
a mixture of uh what I perceive to be extremely wellestablished invasives. And uh this bank is is quite steep as you can see by the contours. And um our concerns uh with this is any kind of replanting effort would result in
significant erosion um and it would be rather difficult to remain it free of invasives uh moving forward. Um, we believe that this project complies with fal bylaw and with previously approved projects. And at this point, I will stop
sharing my screen so that we can have some questions. >> Thank you, Jake. Um, so I will turn to Jen. >> Yes, M Mr. chairman, we did go out, we kind of collaborated in the field, figured out an area where Jake could um
put the the new mitigation. We were concerned about the shading and therefore talked about removing the privet. So, thank you for doing that, Jake. Uh the board is going to have to make a determination on that previously cleared area. Um
it is surrounded by a sea of invasives. um any natural plantings, any replanting in that area probably wouldn't last more than a year or so before being in t taken over by invasives. Um
so the board's going to have to decide what you want to do with that area. Um there's no way to put like a mo strip where we usually do. Um it is fairly steep slope. So, we'll just have to um
discuss that in deliberation and see what the board wants to do. That's all, Mr. Chairman. >> Thank you. Alyssa, do you have any anything to add? >> Nothing to add. Thank you. >> Okay. Well, then I will turn to comments or questions from the commission and
I'll start with David Kent. >> Seems to me that we have a pretty much agreement from everyone who's spoken that the uh we should not do anything on that steep bank down behind the house. So that makes sense to me. Then Jake, I have just one question about the plan. It's a small thing. Right above the new
addition. It's kind of in the the darker brown area. There is a is there a stairway there? It seems to be a stairway to nothing. You may want to show the plan again. >> Yeah, sure. Let me uh let me share my screen again. >> May not be a very important question, but I've always I've always wondered
about this on this project. >> Okay. So uh you're talking. So, uh, so up up here, uh, we're at elevation 42, and by the time you get, uh, down here around the side of the
house, this this is the 32 contour right here. So, there's a there's a 10-ft drop in grade along the side of the house. >> Jake, I got it. I thought it was up. It's down. >> Yeah. So, it it's it's it's dropping down and then, of course, the slope continues to dump down toward the toward the bottom of the hill.
>> Say no more. Sorry about that. Thank you very much. That's okay. I'm all set. >> So, you're all set, David. >> I'm all set. >> Jim, >> I'm all set. Thank you. >> All right. Um, Bill Duffy, >> no questions, Mr. Chairman.
>> And Steve Patton, >> no questions, Mr. Chairman. >> Ron Driscoll, >> no questions. I'm all set. Thank you. >> All right. And Ron Bowman, >> I'm good as well. Thank you. >> And I'm good. So, your your mother must
be excited to be able to put toys in your stocking cuz there's no coal on this one either. All right. >> Motion to close a hearing and take it under adisement. Driscoll. >> We have a second. >> Duffy second. >> All right. We have a motion and a second to close the hearing. I'll start with
Ron Bowman. >> Bowman. I >> and Ron Driscoll. >> Oh, Driscoll I. >> And Steve Patton. >> Patton I. >> And Bill Duffy. >> Duffy. I. and David Kent >> Kent I >> and Jim McGrath
>> McGrath I >> and Bird I we have we have closed this hearing. Thank you very much. Next up on the docket uh is Shellyley Hup Avenue
Falmouth Mass to permission to conduct for permission to con conduct invasive species removal and restoration. install a new core fiber roll array and conduct beach nourishment. And what do
we have, Jen? >> Yes, Mr. Chairman. I'm promoting Angela Tanner from Crawford Land Management to present the continued project. Oops. Sorry, Angela. I'm coming. I thought I grabbed you. Oh, I did before Angela jumps on us. Quorum.
What's the quorum on this one? Shelly, help. >> Uh, the quorum is everybody. >> Everybody. All right. On that note, Angela, you're on deck. Hi, I'm Angela Tanner from Crawford Land
Management representing the homeowner and I'm covering for Andy tonight who couldn't be here. Um, there were some minor revisions on the plan that I know she worked with Alyssa to figure out and
those include adding a Vista corridor to the plan. We took the sweet fern off of the plant list as requested and increased um the rest of the native shrub species in order to cover that.
The existing split rail fence is only going to be repaired. It's not going to be extended any further from where it is now. And there are four of the trees that were shown along the property line which have been relocated to within the
buffer restoration area. Angela, do you want me to share my plan for you or >> um I do >> I do have it. Okay. >> I I do have it. Um >> Okay. I had it pulled up. I didn't know someone from Crawford. >> I was having a hard time um with Adobe.
So hopefully this will work. >> If you can't I have it pulled up if it doesn't work for you. Angela, >> can you see it? >> Yep, we can see it. >> Okay. So the Vista corridor you can see is right in this corner over here. And then the trees that were along this
property line, most of them have been moved over to be within the restoration area. And then this this sweet fern has been replaced with various native shrub species all within the same area.
And I think that covers it. >> Okay. >> Thank you, Angela. You can stop sharing. >> Okay, I will uh Jen, do you have any questions, comments? >> Crawford land management has addressed all the staff's concerns and comments,
so I have nothing addition. >> Alyssa, do you have anything? >> No comments. Thank you. >> Okay, I'll turn to conservation. Uh David Kent, >> I'm all set. >> And Jim McGrath, >> all set as well. >> Bill Duffy,
>> I'm all good. Thank you. and Steve Patton. >> Thanks. I think it's good to get these uh vision views settled at the same time. It works out pretty good. Thanks a lot, Angel. >> Um and um Ron Driscoll.
>> Yeah, it's almost seeing five to 10 years when the fiber array roll fails. So, >> okay. And Ron Bowman. >> Oh, good. Thank you. >> And I'm I don't have any questions. And Angela, you don't you Santa can bring
you a full stocking of toys this year. There's no cost. >> Oh, thank you. I appreciate that. >> Okay. Do I have a motion to close? >> Make a motion to close the hearing. Take it under advisement at Driscoll. >> And and we have a second. >> All right. We have a motion and a second to close the hearing. Are there any comments in the public chat room?
I'm sorry, I forgot to ask that before. >> No, not problem. Nothing in the public chat. >> Okay, hearing that, we'll call for the role. Uh David Kent >> Kent I >> and Jim McGrath >> McGrath I >> and David uh Bill Duffy
>> Duffy I >> and Steve Patton >> Patton I >> and Ron Driscoll >> Driscoll I >> and Ron Bowman >> Bowman I >> and Courtney Bird I. Okay, we've uh we've closed that hearing. Thank you
very much Angela. You have a great night, Angela. Okay, moving along. The next one is Farar Nani, KFN Hillside Nominee Trust 24 Willis Lane, Falmouth, Mass. Permission to conduct dune and
beach nourishment. Do we have a quorum? What is the quorum for this one? What is the quorum for this hearing? It's a continued one. >> Yep, it's everybody. >> It's everybody. Okay. Even me. >> Even you, Courtney.
>> All right. So um we have it looks like Jack Vicero hiding. >> Yes, Mr. Chairman. I've promoted Jack Vicaro from Epsilon Associates up to present his continued hearing. Good evening, Jack. >> Hi. >> Good evening, Jim. Good evening, Mr.
Chairman. And >> you're on you're on deck, Mr. Vicaro. >> Wonderful. I um I here this evening Jack Ferrell from uh Epsilon Associates where I'm a lead scientist in the coastal and offshore group. I'm here to continue our hearing
that was uh begun last week uh where I presented uh the hear the uh project which is the nourishment of a dune and uh beach area at the east end of this property. Um at that time most of our
discussion centered on the uh the two drift fences that are proposed for the project. Um there was some discussion as to whether or not the fence should be proposed as a a permanent fixture or uh temporary. Uh your conservation
administrator expressed some discomfort at uh having the fence installed on a permanent basis. So we agreed to go back and discuss it with the project team and see what we could do. And uh we it it was determined that the fence could be installed in in a in a way that allows
the fence panels to be removed uh during the winter months. Uh the plan would be to remove all of those panels um no later than November 1st and reinstalling them no sooner than
March 1st and no later than April 1st just to avoid any conflict with uh uh the conditions that Natural Heritage has put forward on the project. Uh so we did resubmit uh the spec uh the spec sheet for the uh drift fence and also the plan
set with a notation to uh to that effect that the fence would be um a temporary structure with removals over the winter months. So that's really uh the only plan revision I think we've uh uh provided you now with with uh all that
was required. So, I would ask that the commission uh could close the hearing and issue an order. Thank you. >> Thanks, Jack. Um, Jen, do you have any comments? >> Yes, Mr. Chairman, I'm Even though the
panels are being removed in the winter months, staff still has to go on record say we have we do have concerns with the the I know the sturdiness, robustness of the fencing. Um, we received a fact
sheet late today. It came uh from Natural Heritage, but it's not their fact sheet. It's CZM's fact sheet, coastal zone management. And if on page five, it talks about sturdy drift fencing. I sent it all too
late. I apologize. Sturdy drift fencing um is not recommended because of erosion concerns. Um, so, uh, the board did ask Jack to to make some of the panels removable. He has
done that, but staff still has to go on record saying we just have concerns with the just the um, uh, solidness, I guess, of the fence. And again, apologize for sending the
fact sheet late. We got it around 4:00. Um, but that's all, Mr. Chairman, >> Jim, is it possible to put a uh that uh map or p picture of the fence up on the screen cuz I
>> Jack, do you have it available real quick or no? >> Yeah, I could bring it up. >> Thank you. Here. >> I'd have to go into I am connected, but it' take me a minute to find it. >> Yeah, >> we just just need the fence. Okay,
>> if you can expand that a little bit so it's we can see the whole fence and if you can make that zoom in on that. Okay, so that in looking at this um it appears if I were looking at this picture I
would assume that where the post dis stop is grade but that's not the real case. Where is grade actually? In other words, your diagram essentially shows the length of the post. It doesn't
show anything in relationship to where the grade is. >> Yeah, that's correct. I mean, it's it's there there is some variability to this. I mean, the fence could be installed to whatever height uh we needed to, but typically when I've seen these types of
fence installed, I would say the bottom of those uh column uh slats or pickets >> uh would be, you know, within six inches of the of the um grade of the beach. >> Yeah. And I for clarity sake, because
when I looked at this last week when you showed this, I looked at it and maybe it's just because I'm old. Um, I thought, what is the use of this thing? It looks like a clos line, not not a U retaining fence. Well, you know what I'm
saying? In other words, you you if you can put the grade grade lines in there, that'll make it a lot clearer what what this is. >> That's my only comment. Okay. >> So, you can unshare. There you go. Okay. So, um I'm sorry,
Alyssa, do you have any uh questions? >> Not at this time. Thank you. >> Okay. So, I will solicit comments from the uh commission. I'll start with Ron Bowman. >> Jack, thank you for making that alteration. I I I think uh I think I'm
good and I think we should move forward. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay, Ron Driscoll. Yeah, just it essentially we're putting a a temporary structure in a velocity zone for six months and then taking it down for six months. This is sort of like a a play structure at Felma Yacht
Club or some other things that we uh mandate if there's a storm coming it has to be stored inside or removed from the removed from the resource. So, I'm okay with this. >> Thank you. >> Uh I'm sorry, Alissa, do you have a
comment? >> Just to note, there is a time of year restriction on the beach. So, these structures are not allowed to be maintained while the birds are on the beach. So, if there was a storm, they really can't be touched. Um, I don't recall if it said, you know, with
>> Oh, boy. >> the monometer. >> Um, so they're it's it's tricky. I mean, we typically see the opposite. These fences installed in the winter when it acrews sand after, you know, it gets hit by these winter storms and storms. So the the presence of the birds make this.
>> Okay. Is that I think it's you your sound kind of cut out a little bit. We need better internet. Next uh uh are you satisfied, Bill? Uh Ron, I'm sorry. You're all >> I mean there's all sorts of regulations
colliding here. You know, we're we're sort of stepping our bounds here to put up a put up the structure and now it's going to be it might not be six months. It could be and again it's the opposite side of the year. So the six months could be down to if the birds are out there you can't put it in or if it's something the storm is coming you can't
go take it down. So uh I think it's going to be a real learning experience but they're going to have to be on their toes and I guess have to be on their toes too make sure that it works. >> Okay, David Ken.
>> Well I I guess I have a question for Ron. Ron, are you suggesting it might be better to just make it permanent? Um, I'm asking Ron, what do you what do you think? >> Ch, can you answer that question? I see your hand. >> No, he asked Ron.
>> Ron's opinion of mine. >> Ron Ron Driscoll, can you hear me? >> Yeah, now I can hear you. I >> I guess you're I just the overall I just what you were saying a minute ago. I just I'm not quite sure kind of what you're getting at there. Are you suggesting maybe it should be permanent?
because it is complex. Uh well when we can do it when we can't and are you suggesting we should simplify it and keep it. >> I suggest we you know we let it go. I mean if we need the f if they have to have a fence up there then it's going to have to be some of restrictions on it and again we get time of year we get
birds. Um it's going to be a difficult time. >> There doesn't have to be a fence. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Yeah. If >> there's no fence, we don't have to worry about it. >> If there is no fence,
>> Jen, did you want to respond to >> No, I mean did um I can't remember Dave, but Ron said they have to have a fence. They don't have to have a fence. They're asking for the fence. the fence is being installed like kind of in a and Jack can explain why the fence is being installed
in summer season versus the winter season when we typically see snow fencing installed to help accrete sand during the winter months. Um, and again, the fact sheet I sent you from CZM does have concerns with this sturdy kind of
drip fencing. So, you know, the staff's concerns remain the same. and you have a structure in a velocity zone. It's being installed kind of opposite and it is a very very sturdy structure and not the typical sand
fencing we see. Um but that's all Mr. Chairman. >> Well, I guess >> um so are you good, David? >> No, not quite. Um, I mean I I know I asked Jack last week. It still alluded to me a bit of what the
purpose of this is, this fence is. And then given all this complexity, it's bringing up to my mind, is it worth it, Jack? Is it really necessary? >> That's a fair question. I mean, I've seen drift fences do uh exactly what I'm
hoping this drift fence will do, which is accrete sand and allow for growth of the dune. Um, such that the additional mass could help um, you know, provide some measure of uh, storm damage
prevention to the to the house that's sitting behind this dune. So, I I can tell you I've also seen cases where drift fences have not been effective. And um it doesn't seem to me that it really matters whether it's a um
>> spindly wire mounted drift fence or if it's a more rigid structure. Um, I don't I don't u pretend to understand why CZM is uh expressing concerns about a rigid structure because I've seen those types of fences be very effective uh in
Falmouth and elsewhere. Um, so I I'm not sure how best to to >> I guess I guess I I guess I would say it's pretty complex, but if you think it's still necessary, I I'm I'm going to I'm going to say I'm okay with it.
I think I'm done. >> Bill Duffy, do you have anything? >> Yeah, I was just for the longest time I actually didn't even look where it was um supposed to be and I was just getting my bearings on it. Um I'm sort of
more agreeing on the staff side of this. I'm not sure the the point of the fence other than sort of privacy. I mean, it could help the dune. It could not help the Dune. it's, you know, reading some of the literature and stuff like that on it. Um,
I'm not sure that type of offense is probably necessary. Um, so that's sort of where I'm leaning on this one. >> Okay. Anything else? >> Okay. Uh, Jim McGrath,
>> I mean, I'm surprised this is the first time we're coming across something like this with the drift paths. I mean, do we have any experience with this kind of fence in the past? Success, failures? >> We've had snow fencing installed during
winter months. Um, I off the top of my head, I can't think of one, Jim. I can certainly research it and get back to you, but sitting here right now tonight, I I can't think of one off the top of my head. Um,
>> so this is the first time something like this has come in front of the commission. >> Probably not. We have seen kind of sturdy fences like this before, but honestly, I can't remember if we've actually permitted them or not, Jim.
>> Okay. Um, I know we have permitted that more traditional kind of wider slat >> with the wire snow fence that you usually see on the beaches. We permitted that all the time that's quickly installed, quickly removed.
>> These types of structures are a little more permanent. >> Um, and again, >> you can review the fact sheet I sent you. >> Yeah. So, >> just to add uh what John says, I've been on the commission for I think 20 years
or something, and I've never seen an application with this specific type of fence. Um, whatever that's worth. Um, I mean, I could have missed a meeting, but um, you know, I haven't seen it. Uh, where did
we leave off? Jim, were you the Did I get to you, Jim McGrath? Yeah, I'm good. >> Okay, you all set? >> I am. >> Okay, Steve, >> I I find this sense interesting. I understand the guidelines and staff's
position, but I'd like to see if it helps. >> You'd like to see what? I'm sorry. >> I'd like to see if it helps. >> Yeah. >> The particular, you know, every every property we look at has different structures and elements. This one's
particularly interesting. I think it would be helpful. >> Okay. Have we have I covered everybody on the commission at this point? My screen moved around and all of a sudden I lost track of where I was in terms of calling on people. I would make one
comment. I and that is if we decide that this is okay to permit. I would like to see um the fact that if we if there's bad weather in the summer time like a hurricane coming that that
there be in the order conditions that this fence is removed. Um otherwise it's a barrier in in my mind it's a becomes a projectile. So I would want to see it removed in hierarchy. Other than that I
have no other comments. >> Mr. Chairman, one thing Jack, if the board were to entertain this um we would have to put a condition on somehow that you know while they're doing this work
if they had to remove it for let's say a hurricane major storm event that it would have to be monitored by Mass Audabon. Is that are you agreeable to that? Oh, >> of course. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> If they if they decide to do it, um that's going to have to be a condition
and it's going to have to get accepted by Natural Heritage. >> So, that would be uh for the same time frame, April April 1 to August 1. >> Correct. Yeah. >> Correct. Yeah. Just within the time of year restriction time frame. >> Yep. >> And for sure if we approve this and it
fails, there will be coal in your stocking next year. ne next year future stocking. >> All right. >> Any other comments from our commissioners? >> And is there any com anybody in the chat room? Jen >> trying to get there. Mr. Chairman, my
mouse isn't working for a second. Hang on. >> Doesn't look like there's anything in the chat. Mr. Chairman, >> is everybody at their peace and happy? >> Okay, I'll take a motion to um >> close the hearing and take it under adisement.
Bowman second. >> All right, we have a motion to second to close the hearing and take it under advisement. So I'll start with you, Steve Patton. >> Pat I. >> Jim McGrath I >> David Kent >> Kent I. >> Bill Duffy.
>> Duffy. No. >> All right. Ron Driscoll. >> Driscoll. I >> uh Ron Bowman. >> Bowman. I >> Bird eye. The vote was uh was it four to one or
>> in favor? Motion carries. >> Motion carries. >> Very good. >> Good night, Jack. You have a nice holiday. >> Yeah. Thank you all. Merry Christmas everyone. >> Thank you. >> Merry Christmas. >> Okay, moving on. Next, we have uh uh
let's see. That was Willis Lane, correct? Yes. So, Robert and Carara Martin, trustees 80, I'm sorry, 58 Westwood Road LLC, 58 Westwood Road, Falmouth, Mass, for permission to
constru uh conduct invasive species removal and install restoration uh plings. This continued hearing has not been open, so everybody's on the quorum. >> Hang on, Mr. Chairman. I accidentally
promoted somebody up. I grab them instead. So, need to make Mr. Anastasia back into attendees. Maria, I'm coming to get you. And Brian Wall, where'd you go? Okay,
so Mr. Chairman, I have Jake Fricky from Capan Islands Engineering. I have Maria Hickey from Maria Hickey Landscape Associates and I'm promoting Brian Wall from Tor Wall Associates.
This is their project. >> I should remind you all that I have Cole for your stockings. So, that in mind. Um, and as a matter of fact, Brian will just get a a thing in his stocking anyway by default. All right. Uh, who's
presenting >> in this group? >> Are you the presenter? >> Mr. Chairman, I would like to start. Just give me one second. I just got promoted. Um, just trying to get >> Sorry about that, Brian. >> No, no, it's okay, Jen. No, no problem. I I understand.
>> Um, so, Mr. Chairman, if it would please the commission and the members, I would like to start the presentation. And, um, >> you certainly may. You certainly may. I have Nicole running for you. >> All right, go ahead.
>> Um, so good evening members of the commission, Mr. Chairman. Uh, for the record, my name is Brian Wall. I'm an attorney. I have an office in Sandwich and I represent the applicants tonight, Robert and Cara Martner Martin, who are owners of the property at 58 Westwood Road in North Falmouth. Um, also
representing me tonight, as you can see on the panel, are Jake Fricky of Cape Islands Engineering and Maria Hickey of Maria Hickey and Associates Custom Gardens and Landscapes. Um, this notice of intent is proposing restoration
plantings, mitigation plantings, and invasive species removal and management. The reason why the NOI is being proposed is to address unpermitted clearing and installation of a lawn and unpermitted construction of a shed. So just by way
of background, the property is a 30,000 square ft lot and on the east is 58 Westwood Road in North Falmouth. On the west, the lot fronts on Buzzard's Bay. To the north of the lot is a 40 foot wide rightway that provides access for
the residents in the neighborhood to get to the beach. And actually, I just realized, Mr. Chairman, I I dove in. Could I ask um Jake to put up the plan so that we can look at this while I'm talking? >> That would be great, Dave. >> Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
>> If you can perform that magic, Jake, you're uh you get a gold star. No coal. >> All right. Excellent. >> Right. So there you you can see the plan and Mr. Chairman and members of the commission, I'm not going to get into the detail of the call as Maria is going to do that, but just by way of
background, I wanted to orientate the commission um to the property. So again, um on the east side is Westwood Road. On the west side is Buzzard's Bay. On the north you can see that 40 foot wide
access way to the beach that is utilized by the residents in the neighborhood. Um, and the Martins own to the center. They they have what's called the fee or the ownership of the land into the center of that um, shorway, which is relevant to part of our presentation.
The property is developed with a single family dwelling and that was authorized by an order of conditions that was issued in 1994. Now, that order had a limit of work that was just a few feet off the rear of the existing dwelling. And you, Mr. Uh
Fricky is showing you that now. >> It's right here. >> Conditions number one and five of that order of conditions required that the area between the limit of work and the beach was to remain in a natural state. And due to subsequent changes in the
regulations, that area now also happens to be buffer zone and most of it is zone A. Between approximately 2001 and 2020, the Martins incrementally cleared part
of that area to create a lawn because they have a family and they have grandchildren that want to play in that area. This came to the attention of staff in or about um I think it was 2003,
I'm sorry, 2023. And the staff informed the Martins that this was a violation and needed to be addressed. So what the Martins did was they hired a team of experts that includes me, Jake, and Maria. And we
brainstormed and what we thought was the very simplest way and probably the most cost-effective way to address this violation would be simply to propose planting native plants in the lawn area kind of four or 5 ft on center like you
see all the time. But we decided that that would not really provide a quality solution. And the reason being is that the perimeter of the property on the north and the south and in that area between the coastal beach and what is
now the lawn is vegetated and there's a very extensive amount of invasive species in that particular area. And if we planted native plants in the lawn and did not address the invasives, the invasives would simply invade the new
native plants. And as Jen said on a prior hearing, I think the one before me, um they would probably take over and essentially make the restoration frankly almost meaningless. So we thought about it and we decided that actually the invasive species that are there instead
of being a negative actually kind of provided the Martins with a positive. and we thought out of the box and we said instead of just planting the lawn, we could propose extensive amount of removal of the invasive species um replacing them with
native species, restore what I'm going to say is most of the lawn area with natives and also the shoreway is heavily invaded by n uh invasives and we could propose to uh also remove them from that
area and install native species. And in fact, the plan that you see before you has a proposal of a total of 11,871 square ft of proposed removal of native I'm sorry, I keep saying the wrong thing, removal of invasives and
replacement with native species. Now, to state the obvious, the Martins would like to retain some of the lawn behind their house. And fortunately, there's been a change in the commission's regulations since 1994. And
now the commission requires that there be a 10- ft area around the house that does not count for native or restoration plantings. So, obviously, the Martins are going to gain about 10 ft of lawn. They would like the commission to
consider allowing them to retain a little bit more again because of the grandchildren that I mentioned previously. Now what we think is that um I'll strike that. So we to propose this we actually met with staff numerous
occasions. Um we had at least two Zoom conferences. I think they each went about an hour long and we had an hour-ong site visit out frankly in the pouring rain and we went around the yard um from a counter a clockwise position
and essentially talked about all the different areas of the lawn. And I would suggest, and I might stand to be corrected, but I would suggest that the staff is in favor of the invasive species removal and I think the staff sees that as a favorable development
from an environmental perspective. However, there are some respectful disagreements and they frankly fall into two categories. The first is there's a disagreement about allowing the Martins to keep a little bit of the lawn and I
think that staff is compelled by the regulations to take that position and we understand that. But what we're hoping the commission will see is that instead of simply doing that planting of the lawn and kind of walking away from it, we're actually proposing something
that's way above and beyond the call of duty. and we're hoping the commission will work with us to allow this to go forward because of the environmental benefits and allow a small amount of the lawn to remain. The other respectful disagreement happens to do with the
methodology and you're going to hear more about that from Maria in one second. Maria is proposing to remove a lot of the invasives, not all of it, but a lot of it by mechanical means because she believes it's better for the outcome
of the project to take it down to the substrate and then plant natives back in there and they'll they have a better chance of surviving and thriving if we do that. Whereas the staff is of the opinion that most of the work should be
done by hand and much of the vegetation should be able to stay in place where the invasives are simply selectively removed. And we understand staff's position, but again, we have a respectful disagreement about that and we'd ask the commission um to hear us
out on on these arguments. And having said that, this is the perfect place for me to segue um to Maria because I'm obviously not an expert in invasive removal and Maria is. So, having said that, I'm available for um questions and
I certainly probably will have some additional comments, but at this point, I'd like to turn it over to Maria to pick up from this point. >> Maria, you're on. >> Good evening. Can everyone hear me? Okay. >> Yep, >> we can.
>> Okay. Good evening, staff, the board, Maria Hickeyi, Maria Hickey and Associates Landscapes. Uh Courtney, you're doing a great job running the meeting tonight. I think this might be the fastest meeting that I've ever sat through. I love it. And you have two
opportunities to give me a call. Saturday is Saturday is the anniversary of my 29th birthday. So there's option number one and then obviously we have Christmas. Uh, and as a person born on top of Christmas, it's a little tough
because you usually get one present that counts as two. And then I had my son on my birthday as well, so I'm even further removed down the list. Anyhow, um, I am a certified invasive plant manager in Massachusetts and Rhode Island and have
done a significant amount of invasive species habitat restoration projects. I was thinking about it the other day. In the last 15 years, I've planted over a million native shrubs, trees, perennials, and ground covers. Um,
and I love to share my enthusiasm and my knowledge about this field of how we can take a resource area and dramatically improve
the qualitative value of it. Um, as Brian said, we had some meetings on site with staff who have been working really hard on this project to try to not only do what's required, but go above and beyond and make a significant
improvement in restoring and offering a higher value of habitat. So, first and foremost, um I wanted to just talk about the difference between a mechanical and a manual instru extraction of invasive
species. And I know Jake has some pictures that I sent him that I had included in the landscape narrative that I wanted to show you. Um and before I even if I don't know if Jay can bring those up.
>> Yeah, I'm working on it. Hang on. Okay. Okay. Um, so hopefully you can all all see this. Um, this is showing us lifting up using an excavator invasive bittersweet vines and porcelain
berry vines and their roots can go 30 feet 3 feet down in the ground. A mechanical eradication is 98% effective in getting out all the roots simply just from, you know, the
torque and the power of a machine. The machine sits in one spot on the site. It can reach 22 feet in all directions and the cab rotates um 360°. So effectively, we're sitting on the lawn, their current
lawn to do this work. So, it's almost like uh raking leaves. The teeth of of the bucket rake the roots and they pull and they pull and they pull and then when you lift up, this is what you see. I So, I want I thought it
was really really important for you guys to see these photos. Um, we've done hundreds of these and I'm never I've never been ceased to amaze at the mass and the mat of roots under the surface that you can't see visibly with
your eye. And yes, absolutely using a machine is a significant temporary disruption to the resource area, but it's highly effective in getting out all of the roots that are meshed with your native shrubs, your native trees versus
a manual extraction. There's no way a human being can pull 30 feet of root without breaking it into fragments. And those fragments can regenerate. and you're just contaminating your resource
area over and over again, which leads us to, well, then how do we eradicate these invasives, then it falls into chemical treatment. and having had cancer twice and I'm only 61 years old and I've been
spraying for years and I take all the protocols and I have no history in my family of cancer you know so it makes me concerned of what's the impact a to our environment to our humans to our animals to the vegetation that they eat when
under a manual extraction you're going to be continuously putting toxic chemicals into a resource area over many years. Um, I've had another project in Falmouth that we were denied the use of a mechanical removal
and that project will haunt me for the rest of my life. Um, we have never ever been able to control the resurgence of the invasive vines and vegetation. And I walked away from that project about five years ago because it it, you know, health risks. It's just in my
conscience. I don't feel good about dumping toxic chemicals again and again and again on root systems that are built to survive and outlast our native species. So I again wanted to stress
upon with the mechanical um and are you able to see my mouse when I move it on the plan or not? >> Jake's sharing the plan soon enough. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So so basically
um 95 to 98% of the shoreway probably even closer to 99% is non-native invasive species and vines. and staff agreed, yes, we definitely have to use a mechanical eradication to
get these out. It's impossible to do it manually. So, what the strategy is is to come start at the street side of the shoreway, remove all our invasives as we go down,
and as we remove them and their associated roots, we load them to be trucked off site. We continue all the way down until we get to the lawn and then we will go, you know, across the lawn head itself,
stop and park the machine. And again, we can reach 22 ft in, which takes us, you know, to this area that's loaded with honeysuckle, bittersweet, porcelain berry, vines that are extremely difficult
to remove and eradicate manually. Because when it's only a manual extraction, you still have a contaminated site. Uh, which means you have to continue to treat with chemicals to try to uh prevent this resurgence.
of these vines. Um, and that was one of the reasons why we felt like yes, it's a one-time minimal disruption. Well, not minimal, it's a it's a temporary disruption to have a machine there to remove all the invasives and their
associated root systems. In other words, we clean the floor, but then we're going to replenish the sand, replenish the soil, and replant the entire site. So, now we're starting out with a clean slate
and we've eradicated the non-native invasive vines and species um so that will not dominate and overtake our natives. We're trying to restore and replant a flowering and burying
habitat for our nesting native songirds, our wildlife. Um, even the deer are wandering up and down this corridor. Um, at the end of the day, we want to minimize our disruption to
this area to a basically one-time event. under a manual extraction. We're going to continuously be in here like pruning and manually pulling vines that continue to grow back and putting toxic chemicals into,
you know, our resource area, which definitely impacts humans, animals, the birds, the bees, everything. Um, and I just, like I say, it's a it's a professional um,
opinion that I'm offering having done many of these projects and planted over a a million native shrubs, trees, perennials, ground covers using this method. Um, I wanted to point out that in the shoreway
there are a number of Russian olive trees. If they are not removed, a Russian olive can grow 40 feet tall and 40 feet wide. So your butters across the street are going to lose their view of the ocean,
which is another reason why it makes this incredibly important. We are not expanding the vegetated area of the shoreway. We are containing within the 20 ft that the Martins own and restoring
that 20 ft with native shrubs. Um, okay. So, just to back it up a little bit, when we get down to the beach area and the coastal dune area, and there was great discussion about whether or not there was a dune there
that was removed, was it not? At the end of the day, not that it's irrelevant, but it's the same plants that we're going to plant whether it's a dune or not. And when I go through my plants of we did a project, we had a
half a mile of beach that we had to had to plant. And I I did a test. It was in Rhode Island. And I planted a combination of bear berry and American beach grass to see which would do better to hold the
sand and to keep this beach from eroding. Now, keep in mind, we also have native shrubs as we do in this case. So, the bear berry is being planted as a supplemental ground cover. It's not the only plant that's in there, but what it does
the it it um creates a mat of roots that do not allow the sand to wash away. Jen, is there any way you can disable the comments that keep popping up? >> No. >> Okay. No,
>> unfortunately. No. >> Okay. because when they keep coming up, they're blocking the site plan. And um >> I can't disable the chat, Marie. I'm sorry. >> Okay, that's okay. I'll just keep trying. >> Um but but again, what we're trying to do is provide
the highest form of a functioning wildlife habitat with native species that we can in this area. And Bear Berry has thorns in it. Right now, the Martins have a path that goes down to the beach. The Shoreway also has a path that go
down to the beach. If this um pink thatched area that's thatched in green was just beach grass, people can walk through beach grass. They do it all over Cape Cod, especially in Felmouth on our beaches. We don't want that to happen. We don't want the dune to be trampled.
That's why we're adding Bearberry. People are not going to walk on something that has thorns. So, I I just wanted to to point that out. Also, in our updated um narrative that was submitted on December 8th,
I included um a couple of things. Um there's a on the south bordering lot line, there are two dead cedar trees, like completely dead. So, we're asking for permission and they're in the Bzone.
We're asking for permission to remove those and replant them with native shrubs. There's also a leaning um pine tree that's literally at greater than a 45 degree angle to the house. It's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when it's
coming through the roof. And it while we're there, it makes more sense to remove it, replant it with native shrubs because again, it's close proximity to the house. There's not a tree that we could put in there that has a narrow
canopy that would prevent the same problem from happening again. Also, keep in mind this is a windy site. So, you have a lot of gusty winds coming and that's what created the problem to begin with is that you have a lot of winds.
You also have a lot of non-native invasive vines that have snaked up in the trees that are pulling on the trees and causing their demise. So again, just to reinforce how important it is to
eradicate the non-native invasive species. So we're starting with a clean slate and then replanting the entire site. So the benefit to the wildlife, to humans, um to conservation, it's a win-win for everybody. I know that there
has been great concern by some of the abutters uh about the shoreway and the shoreway uh and there's been lawsuits within this development involving other shoreways. This particular shoreway is 98% invaded
with non-native invasive species. And those invasive species will continue to cross over and infect the resource area and make it very very difficult for the native shrubs and restoration plants
to not only survive but to thrive. Additionally, it's going to block the views of all the abutters across the street because you have Russian olives in there that are going to dominate your
viewfield and completely obstruct and their width is going to grow far greater than uh what the Martins own in the shoreway, which will open another can of worms of now the Shoreway will have to apply for permitting.
um for their maintenance path to prune trees and that opens a whole another discussion that is outside of our um purview. One thing I wanted to bring up was the establishment of a vista
corridor. So, it's been over 25 years since this project received its certificate of compliance. And I find quite often that homeowners don't understand um the meaning of a Vista View pruning
permit. And in the town of Falmouth, um I've worked with staff on Vista pruning. And currently, uh, you know, we're not allowed to prune or alter evergreens. And since the certificate of compliance
was granted over 25 years ago, there are a lot of evergreen seedlings that have, you know, taken hold. Cedars, there's Leland Cyprus, which are not native. And these evergreens are going to continue to grow up
and block the view of our homeowner. and people, you know, a butters on either side. And so we look at, okay, how can we support and help our client maintain their view, which they're paying a lot
of money in taxes on, and work within the rules and regulations. And because there are all these invasive um vines and rosa that are imshed in the roots of these evergreens in the view corridor, our recommendation was we're going to
need to take them out anyhow because if I don't remove these evergreens in the view corridor and I just treat with herbicides, the herbicides are going to impact the roots
of the Leland Cyprus and the cedars. So, you're going to end up with really, really sick trees. I'd rather just be right up front, declare this as our view field. Um, I know conservation has said
that they don't um allow declaring a view a vista quarter in perpetuity. So again, if it has to be conditioned that, you know, every 3 years we review this, apply for another Vista unit permit, we're fine with that. Um, what I'm just
trying to do is create the best scenario for everyone with the most positive significant qualitative improvement and value of this resource area. Um, in my planting plan, I've included a diverse variety of
native shrubs and trees to give us diversity in vertically and horizontally, but most importantly to provide flowering shrubs and burying shrubs to provide food and shelter for our native
wildlife and birds. Um, you know, I I grew up, I'll admit it, binoculars around my neck. And nothing makes me happier to hear the birds singing and to see when I'm working on these projects the habitat
that we've created. And right now there's almost a complete void of anything that blooms and flowers in this entire resource area other than rose of aosa which is down in this pink thatched
area. Rosa uh originates from uh Japan and China and Korea. It's a not it's not a native shrub. It spreads with suckers underground. It's already spreaded in spread into the
lawn area and it's got a more uh larger root system than many of our native shrubs. And quite honestly, when I'm doing an invasive species eradication, I want to take everything out that's not native to I know that staff would love
that we keep the rosa vigosa, but then we're setting a precedent. Okay. Well, if we keep rosa vagosa, then why shouldn't we keep honeysuckle or why shouldn't you know what I mean? It gets a little um murky. I understand the value of the ros of a vagosa. It provide it flowers. It
attracts the bees. It sets rose hips which provides food. So that's why we have listed rose of virginana which has been highly successful on these projects in creating the same habitat. However, you don't have the invasive
um non-native status that you have with Rosa. Um I'm trying to think. I just wanted to quickly reference if there was anything else I wanted to share with you. Um,
okay. So, one other thing I wanted to add was staff had questions on in our plant list. We we listed a a variety of plants and not all of them are shown on the
planting plan. That's because I handp pick every single plant. I go to the nursery and I might spend three days there picking plants, loading them into my box trucks, bringing them back to Cape Cod. I want to make sure we have A+
quality on our shrubs and our trees. And sometimes there may not be those shrubs or trees in the nursery yet. So, I have to go to the next best available tree or shrub. Uh, there's been times that the Bayberry
looks amazing. So, um, right now the nursery that I use I know has 2500 bay in stock from last year. And, um, sometimes I'll buy things at the end of the year and bring them back to my own property so that I can caretake them and
nurture them and have them in the best possible shape that I can. Um, Jake, I was hoping you could bring up a picture of um the bearberry for me just so I can share a little bit um with the board.
You may not all be plant geeks like me. So, not that I'm assuming anything. Maybe you are. Um, so I wanted to share with you uh one of the reasons why we love this plant. It's in my supplement. Let me talk about hyperacum first. So
this is hyperacum densafllorum. Um we go off the list of the barnstable county extension of native plants. That's what all the conservation commissions on Cape Cod use. >> It's listed as native there. It's listed on Massarts.
Um, if you go to like, um, Cornell, North Carolina, all of your states, everyone has it listed in North America on the East Coast as native. Um, I know that staff was not. So, I was a little
concerned whether or not it actually is native. I can tell you that they were extremely respectful and listening to my concerns that our native plant list hasn't been updated in over 20 years. This is a very limited um what we have to offer and they have given me the
opportunity to test out hyperacum in Falmouth on a few projects and it thrived. It outperformed blueberry, low bush blueberry, winter berry, so many of our plants that can struggle in the windy conditions. It
absolutely thrives. Um, okay. So, I guess you don't have bear berry, >> but I can I can tell you that bearberry is an evergreen plant and it spreads and it flowers and
it berries and is a tremendous food source for birds and wildlife, especially when you're in such a harsh condition like this. Um, I was out there just this last week and there's still evidence of a lot
of wildlife on this site and I feel like we could really provide a nice benefit um by by offering the bear berry to plant as a ground cover throughout the area that borders the beach which is shown in the u pink thatched area that
has that we'll be planting rows of virginiaa in. and the hyperacum. I have that in shown in yellow on the on the plan and I also have it shown in the shoreway on the plan. Uh in the plan bordering
the lawn it's only two rows in the shoreway it's two to three rows and primarily the reason that I am planting it in these two areas is because it profusely flowers. It attracts a lot of
butterflies and birds and hummingbirds and dragonflies and what is more beautiful than walking to the beach and seeing all the butterflies? I can't think of and and birds singing and happy. Um, it is blooms from June right
through October and it's just aesthetically pleasing and it has a high habitat value and it also uh will not grow 15t tall in the shoreway which is a concern I'm sure of all the abutters
that they don't want to lose their views or you know lose any of um the area that they want to walk down to access the speech. Okay, I think I've said everything I need to say and I
would be so happy to answer any questions that you may have. >> Thank you so much and I appreciate your listening and um respect for the difference of our opinions that we have. >> So, Mr. Chairman, if I may very briefly, Jake is here primarily to answer
questions unless he has something he wants to add, but we wanted to make sure that he was available to the commission if you had any questions regarding square footage or distances, etc. And before you turn it over, I do I did see the comments coming up in the chat. And
I just wanted to say two things about the Shoreway. Um, in my opinion, I have looked into it. I do believe that the Martins own to the middle and you don't really need to worry about that because the association itself has submitted a
letter saying that they support this project within the Shoreway. So I I think that that's kind of a non-issue as far as rights in the Shoreway. We have the ability to do what we're proposing to do. And having said that, we're very happy to hear questions and comments
from the commission. Hey, Jake, do you have anything that you want to add? >> I don't have anything to add at this time. >> Okay, Jen. >> Yes, Mr. Chairman. Um, staff has a lot of comments. Um,
unfortunately, 95% of the comments and concerns we have have have not been addressed. So, with your permission, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to share my screen and I'm going to bring up their plan and I'm going to go around the plan and point out where the
commission has some concerns. >> Okay. >> Is that okay, Court? >> Yep. Go ahead. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Okay. So, the commission can see this, correct? >> Yeah. All set, Jen.
>> Yep. Okay. Perfect. So, to start, um, where Brian said that this is a violation. This was where the limit of work was, as as Jake had showed you, I just don't want the commission to lose sight of the fact that this is now the current edge
of lawn and that over the years, Mr. Martin has cleared approximately 2700 square ft of buffer. This ranges from 30 ft to 40 ft to 90 ft of buffer
to coastal dune. And it's created a lawn for his family. Um so don't please don't lose sight of that. Um, we can start with over here. This area
right here is about 90. This is almost 100% invaded with invasive species. This is because Mr. Martin has cleared native species in this and the invasives have taken over.
Um, let's let's go back a bit. So, this shed was unpermitted. They're proposing to mitigate for the shed. Correct me if I'm wrong, Jake or Brian. In this area and this area. Correct.
>> Correct. >> Correct. This area was naturally vegetated until Mr. Martin removed the vegetation. This area was supposed to be part of the restoration area. So they're removing
um vegetation or was supposed to be part of the restoration area. I think I think that's what have Fallon has down >> was proposed as restoration in the 1029 plant. >> So this was proposed as restoration. It
um switched to mitigation. This area for mitigation was naturally vegetated until the property owner had removed that native vegetation. Um, we do not do
vista quarters in perpetuity, but um, Maria already touched on that. As far as let's go with methodology. We do have concerns with the methodology proposed
in this area right here. Again, 100% invaded because of the actions of the property owner. have no problem going in there with a mechanical means to remove that vegetation. It there's really nothing left to save in there. Um it
gets a little trickier when you come down into this area when you come into these areas where they're not that invaded. Um Maria, we did have a question that we've asked multiple times and has never
been answered. What are these little hash marks? These little turquoise hash marks >> that shows the area of manual extraction. >> Manual extraction. >> Yeah. So, Jen, that the machine's just going to sit on the yellow area where
the hyperacum is. >> Yeah. >> To reach >> manual extraction. So, you're proposing to go in here and remove this by hand. >> Correct. Correct. >> Okay. Didn't we when we were in the field discuss how this area shouldn't be touched because there really isn't that
many invasives in there. There's a few. So why do we have >> is Rosa Regosa in there? >> And we have already said we have seen multiple projects over the years where Rosa Regosa is removed in certain dune areas and then beach grass just takes
over. You just saw one at 77 Barnack. They removed the Rosa. They planted beach grass. It took over. There were no shrubs left to be planted. It was just a sea of beach grass. There is no reason to remove the rosarosa. It's yes, it's
not native, but it's it it's listed as potentially invasive, but it can be pretty stable. It's happy. This dune is stable. There is no reason to go into this area and remove that. Maria, again, questions that haven't
been answered. What are we doing with all of these trees in this view corridor or all these trees in here? What are we doing with those? Are they remaining? >> Okay, so to back up, it's not just beach grass in this pink area. We're planting
rows of Virginiaiana bear berry and then some beach grass. The ratio, you have >> a label here that says AB, and that's it. And if we go over to your thing, it's beachgrass.
So in this area, it does not say we're planting Bayberry. It did not play say we're planting Ros. >> If you look on the other side of the path, okay, see where it says RV Ros. >> That symbol is supposed to go all the
way across. Uh, so I >> Well, it doesn't. >> Okay. So, um, we can have Jake update that, but the Roosevelt ginata goes all the way across. >> Okay. Again, we discussed in the field and you agreed with us that you weren't going to
go up in here. You said you would there was no reason for you to be in this area and now all of a sudden >> correct. No, with a machine. But I disagreed respectfully about the Rosa Virginia because I mean, excuse me, the Rosa Vagosa because the rose of AOSA has already spread into the lawn.
>> Nothing has spread into that lawn. Maria, I can show pictures right now of that lawn being there's no >> when you kneel down. There is rosa suckers all the way up into the grass area. >> What about these these 4 inch, 2 inch, 6 inch trees? What are we doing with
those? So in our view corridor where there are where there are Japanese honeysuckle bittersweet porcelain berry which there's quite a bit in here. We're going to
>> in this green area >> um in sections of it only where we are infested are we going to remove an evergreen because I I I can't put chemicals
to kill the roots of the invasives without killing the roots of the of the evergreens which is why we're replanting trees. With with all due respect, there are several companies that come in and use herbicide. Oops, did not mean to do
that. Use herbicides and their their projects um their projects are fine. They don't end up killing native shrubs while they're doing their invasive species work. >> Okay. >> But it's a disruption to the habitat
when you you have somebody in there. And on the south side there, it's heavily infested. Um, and if Jake, if you wanted to go back to my narrative, there were pictures that showed how bad the vines were in there. >> So, I want to bring the board's attention to this area right here.
>> Yep. >> 15t. This measures 15 feet of bear berry. >> How do I get this to move, Jake? If I want to them. >> I'm going to stop sharing for one moment
and I'm going to continue to share. One moment. >> What do you mean by move? >> Um, it's something I'm looking on my screen. This is what that path looks like right now. This is maybe 4 ft wide.
Now we're removing all of this and all of this to put in bear berry >> and rose of Virginiaiana and beach grass. And then we're actually not removing it all. Just >> there's natives in there, Maria. That's
m that's a majority of native species there. That's not a sea of invasives. There's no reason to go in there and remove everything just to go back and plant natives. I mean, yes, it is more labor intensive to go in there and go in
and and pick out, but there's no reason to wholesale mechanically remove every piece of vegetation on this site, which is, you know, what you had originally proposed. So, the staff does have concerns with the way this project is is
is being presented. I'm going to keep going around sharing back to my sharing. This area has some invasives in here, but they are completely can be managed without going in with a backhoe and
ripping everything out. Um there's no reason to it that yes the you know we have seen projects in the past it may be a little bit more labor intensive but it can be done and it has been done by half a dozen other companies in Falmouth and
on the Cape that can remove invasives that are intermingled with natives. Again it's labor intensive but Mr. Martin is proposing this in hopes that the board will let him keep part of the lawn that he removed without a permit
for his grandchildren. I I mean this is I have no problem up here with man mechanical removal, but I do have very strong concerns with this area, this
area, this area, and over here. And again, um, I think if we allowed the 10 feet, I drew it on my plan. I can't scale it off here for you today, but I think
>> it if you want to know where it is, it runs between the two O's and wood steps. >> Yeah, I was just going to say that. Yeah, it's >> through the R in garden. >> Yeah. So, if you take this area of white in here, Jake's right. I scaled it off.
I'm not going to be able to draw it because it just won't come out right. But it it kind of bicts this area. So the staff is, you know, we don't want to see plants planted right up against the deck. Again, we we have said we would allow the 10 ft that you currently
allow. Um but quite frankly, we do have severe concerns with the methodology of how this is being done. In certain areas, we can support it. We can't support the mechanical removal, but I cannot support mechanical removal
throughout this entire site. Um, I don't believe that that dune area should be touched. It's stable. It's fine. It there's no reason to go in there and start picking at it. We don't have a
complete idea of what Maria is removing and what she's replacing it with. The plan is not very clear. Um, how are you going to protect that area of sumac that we talked about in the field that's north of the sand path? Maria,
>> so you and I talked about So, you and I talked about when we got to that section that you would be on site and you would make a determination of whether or not >> we should mechanically remove it and plant new sumac in that area. It just
depends on how invaded >> manically remove the sumac. >> Jay, can you bring up in my narrative um the pictures? There's one that shows all the vines and this is from the neighbors property
to the south. Okay. Um keep scrolling up. Okay, so this is on Bob's between Bob and the neighbor. Okay, on the south side. And if you scroll up some more, there's a picture. Keep going with all
the vines hanging out of the trees right there. So, this is what we have on the south side. It's so heavily infested with vines that I'm concerned if you scroll down and you look um if
you don't mechanically remove all of that, you're going to be continuing to disturb this area for the at least the three years of the permit by manually extracting the vines
that will continue to grow back. And that's disruption to your resource area. We would prefer to again I know >> everything out >> and then replant the whole thing and never have to touch it again. I do agree with you Jen. The area and I've said it
again and somehow it I guess I'm not saying it in the right way. The area that borders the beach has minimal invasive. >> It has minimal. >> Yeah. And that's why I said m manual extraction of anything that's in there. But it's as you move, you know, towards
the house, it's heavily infested. And even on his sand path that's lined with the rocks, there's some areas in there that are heavily infested. Again, I'm not >> There isn't. There isn't, Maria. We were down there. There's no areas down by that sand path that are heavily invested. If you if you're headed
towards the house on the right side, there's a big pocket of and on the left too, Russian olive and bittersweet and honeysuckle >> and you can remove that. You cannot remove 15 ft of that dune area and plant
bear berry when there's already shrubs back in. If Jake, if you can go back to the plan, please. >> Yeah. >> That's not what your plan says. Okay. So if you start down at the edge of the beach from
north to south. So obviously the green is Bberry. The pink is Rosa Virginiaiana interplanted with Bberry. >> That's not what it says. >> It says Bberry. >> But the symbol the symbol up top. See that says RV
in the north. Okay. That symbol should be carried all the way through. I'm not sure why it wasn't, but that's how I had put it on the planting plan. I want all shrubs in there. >> Okay. Um, and then your next layer,
Jake, can you enlarge it on your end? I just can't see. Um, >> I want everyone to be able to clearly see this. and and Maria at the bottom right hand of uh or bottom left there's probably a little uh pencil with a line
coming out of it. If you if you click on that thing it'll open up pallet of tools and the top tool is a mouse and if you click on that we should be able to see where you want to be pointing. >> Okay. Um I won't even go to that that link. I
just want everyone to know that from the edge of the beach where you see Bayberry all the way to the lawn where the lawn previously was, those are all shrubs 4T on center. All shrubs.
It's It's hard to depict this on a plan. Um, and I think this is where the confusion was. Um, with >> there's no confusion. >> Um, with All right. It's not. Um, can you see the pencil moving? >> Yes or no? >> No. But if you start clicking, you might
get you might be able to draw. Yeah. >> You have to draw something with pencil. >> So, what I'm trying to show is this whole pink area that has the green hatches. That's all rows of a ginata. In between the rows of a ginata, we're
planting bearberry to offer more food and shelter. Then we go into Bayberry. Um, there's beach plum in here. That's not what the plan says. >> Okay. And I I can't enlarge it on this end. I don't know why.
>> It's okay, Maria. >> Moving forward. >> But but I just want everyone to understand that this is a densely planted site of shrubs. You can't walk through here when we're done. That's the whole point. We don't want it disturbed.
And if we don't mechanically, I'm not talking about the area that you and Jen that you and I agree should not be taking a machine to, which is where you currently have talked about it on the south side of the property as well in
that corner where you the green meets, you know, maybe not along the sides, but we also discussed it. There's no reason to rip them out. There's bittersweet intertwined with native shrubs. Remove the bittersweet. The native shrubs can stay. There's no reason to rip out the
natives just because it's going to be a little bit more labor intensive to get rid of the bittersweet. And I'd like to remind the board that this is a violation and the board is in the driver's seat. We don't have to accept this plan. We
can require Mr. Martin to put back that buffer with or without invasive species work if Mr. Martin does not want to compromise and work with this commission and work with the staff. You don't have room to mitigate for that shed. So, I'm not quite sure why we're
showing mitigation in areas that were previously vegetated and that vegetation was removed by your client. Um, so we just continue to have a number of concerns. The only concerns that were addressed was we won't ask for the view
corridor in perpetuity, although I don't believe that was written anywhere. and we asked for mitigation for the shed, but it simply can't be the mitigation simply can't fit when you bring the property back to what it should be. I think the board or the
staff, you know, telling the telling Mr. Martin that, you know, our current regulations don't, you know, don't have plants planted straight up to the house was reasonable. We would be giving him 10 ft of lawn around the back of the
house. Um, and and I think the board should stick to that. As far as the the this invasive species management, the board can condition it however you'd like. Um, but again, your staff
who's been doing this for a number of years and has worked with various restoration experts that have used herbicide methods for su successful projects, although they it does take a while longer. Um, we do have serious
concerns and still have serious concerns after the multiple meetings we've had with the project team. Um, Courtney, I think Alyssa has some stuff she wants to say too, but that's all I have for now. >> Okay, you can stop uh sharing and
Alyssa, could you uh give us your two cents? >> Yes. Um, I do have many things to say, though I will refrain from um repeating what Jen has already said other than issuing my full support for
everything she said. um working on site, we distinctly discussed not using any mechanical means past the flag pole on the southern property and there are still a lot of natives over there. Um this board has seen and we've talked many times about protecting our dune
systems and how a lot of projects recently have not been successful and keeping that Rosa Rivera out there will be instrumental in keeping this dune system intact. >> It's 95% native. It's very healthy. Significant work does not need to take
place and there's no reason minor cut and wipe chemical treatment would not be effective, though albeit um require a longer time frame. Um I'm still not sure how a view corridor is even applicable on this property. Staff has several concerns with the variety of plantings
chosen and their particular locations on the property given the wind and salt that will impact them. Um there's absolutely no room for mitigation. This was discussed three years ago when this started. Um the trees are far too close to the property line. They should be pulled back a bit. Um particularly with
the controversy over the shoreway plantings. Um the commission should not entertain any bargaining in this situation. This is a violation. You have regulations. Um giving a little to take a little here should never be a part of your conversation. Nor should decisions
be made based on the lives of property owners. Property owners change all the time. Um, so your regulation should be upheld and either required to be replanted up to that original limit of work or at the 10- foot offset. Um,
this has been a a difficult one. Thank you. >> Okay. Um, do we I'm going to go to comments by the uh commissioners and I'll start with Ron Bowman.
quite the presentation, I must say. Um, the staff seems to have a lot of uh issues with what's going on. I honestly did not get out to this site. I'd like to go out there uh soon. If I I'm sure
this is going to get continued and there's going to have to be some uh some changes to the plan. Um yeah, I get some concerns. So, uh, that's all I have. Thank you.
>> Okay. Um, Bill Duffy. >> So, I saw the comments in the chat about the Shoreway and I've also, um, actually someone's actually asked to raise some concerns. Um, Brian, I think you said
that you have a letter from the association that supports this project. So I think that would need to be um submitted you know as record for us to actually take a look at it but with quite a contentious area for the
shoreway. Um so there's that. I agree with Ron. There's a lot of stuff that needs to be worked out. Um I also have not got to the site. Um, and it seems like, in my
opinion, we're trying to do a lot to preserve a lawn that shouldn't even exist. Um, and until that gets sort of talked about a little bit more, um, yeah, so those are my concerns with this.
>> Okay. Um, I just might point out to the commission that uh when we're hearing these things, we're we're uh dealing with a conservation commission. We're dealing with the regulations uh and the town bylaw and and so legal
questions about access on that um beachway to the on the border and what goes on in there are outside our our purview and and we shouldn't waste our time considering it. It may it may be a
problem but it's not our problem that's resolved. Okay. Thank you. >> One thing Mr. chairman. Um we have received several correspondents from a butters from the association um from a butters attorneys. I do believe we've sent all that to you but
it was several months ago. So we will resend those tomorrow. Um it'll be the uh letter from the the the association. Um Brian, I don't believe you submitted a letter regarding the Shoreway, did you? I was actually if I I know that
it's not time for a rebuttal, but if I could just say to Mr. Duffy that the letter was submitted by the association itself. Um, and I have a copy of it. We're aware of the letter and it says that the association, the board of directors that is that controls the
association supports the project. >> Thank you for that. >> In the short way, >> we will we will send those letters off to everyone tomorrow. Like I said, it has been a few months, but we do have a letter from the association as well as an a butter attorney's letter regarding
the Shoreway. It all it is all very legally complicated. Um and it's something that we're we're not just going to get involved with. >> Yeah. Well, that that's my point is that we are considering the regulations and
not the legal issues that go on here. though though they may be relevant, it's not relevant to our deliberation. >> Thank you for that clarification. >> Yeah. Okay. Do you have anything else, Bill, before I >> No, I do not. Thank you.
>> Okay. Thank you. Uh Jim McGrath, now you're muted, Jim. Now, if you live nearby, you can shout real loud. >> I I would like to get out there and see the property. I haven't I haven't been out there either. Uh it's a little concerning that there's no mitigation
available for that shed. So I don't know what what's been done in the past. Does the shed have to go away? But yeah, that seems to be a lot more questions that need to be answered than uh than we're getting right now. >> Okay. Thank you. You is that your comment? You
>> Thank you. >> Ron, did Ron Driscoll, did I get to you or did you get >> Yeah. Um, this has been going on for a long time and I'm I'm amazed that there's still such a large discrepancy between what our administration and the regulations say and what our, you know,
our attorney has presented a strong advocate for his applicant and, uh, and also for Maria's great presentation. Um, I couldn't possibly think of closing this tonight. uh it doesn't have to be continued and it has to be an awful lot of more work done towards our
regulations especially with the strong opinions of uh our administrators and the strong questions they have about the everything that goes on on the site. So what I it's all I have to say. Thank you. >> Okay. Thanks. Um I I think your
observation is correct, Ron. Uh Steve Patton. Thank you and and thank everybody for their presentations that were both uh comprehensive and instructive at the same time. But I honestly feel that
uh um I I didn't realize that that the changes had occurred through the efforts of the occupant that had changed it. It it changed my uh opinion this evening and I
think I um believe we should go back to the originally approved uh order of conditions. Um and I I'd be most comfortable in that kind of position. I don't have any specific questions,
>> but thank you. >> Thank you, Steve. Uh David Kent >> um when I visited the site uh I saw the large uh lawn in the back. When I came back and discussed the project with staff, I was very surprised to see how much have been there have been expansion
back there. And I mean both of our staff members have mentioned this is a serious this is a violation and I'm emphasizing that if you go out there and look at the size of that that backyard the 10 ft is well we that's giving more than we originally approved but it's quite a violation there. So I would emphasize
what the two staff members said. Remember folks this is a violation. The other thing I can't keep track of all the uh different detail in the mitigation and and the removals is there an awful lot of detail in conflict there. I couldn't really follow it all. So I agree with other chamber members of
the commission. We need a lot of work on that to to come to agreement. So there's a lot more work to do. I would just emphasize this is a pretty big violation here, guys. So that's all I have to say. >> Thank you, David. Uh did I miss anybody
before I weigh in? No. Okay. So, a couple of observations on that that dune that exists is yeah, it has some invasives mixed in, but it's heavily it's heavily vegetated.
Uh, and my fear is that um, you know, you're yes, you can remove some invasives, but you're you're destabilizing that bank. and I just would have a real problem of going
in there. I also want to comment about Rosa Regosa and I've been on this commission long enough to remember when at one point apparently Rosa Marosa wasn't considered an invasive and I see Maria laughing. In
fact, you know, back in the 90s, we would have a conservation commission hearing and you know, and at the end it was almost like a going to a Catholic confection. You the commission would rule, okay, plant 10 Rosa plants and
give $100 to the conservation commission, go in peace >> and three hammers. And and so ro the rosarosas were planted everywhere. And if anybody is uh bothered to pick
rose hips from rosarosa, it makes great jam and jelly. >> And it also quite honestly makes great habitat. And even though it's been removed from our invasive list, you know, I don't have a personally as a member of this
commission in 20 years, I don't have a heart attack with it at all. Uh because it provides food and vegetation and it's one of few plants that can stand up to really intense windy environments.
And so, you know, if it's there, maybe we don't put it in in the in the future, but I can speak from from experience that Rosa Virginia, which is supposed to be the
poor man's Rosa Ragosa, doesn't have the same degree of survivability in harsh environments. and Ro and Maria, all you got to do is come out to my house and look at it after I planted it to comply with
conservation. And yet my roseo, which I didn't plant, is very happy. So, you know, I if it ain't broke, don't fix it is my philosophy here. And I I just think I think you guys need to have
a restoration plan for this site. I don't think you but I think you don't need to restore something that ain't broke and so I'd leave that dune alone and solve the address the immediate question of the violations near the
house. Those are my only comments. Do we have any other things? Where are we here? Are we going to continue this? >> Am I allowed to speak or >> I'm sorry staff I mean the uh audience must have something. Is there a bunch of people? Well, am I allowed before we go
to the audience to um just answer a couple of the concerns? >> Um yeah, but go ahead. >> Okay. So, Courtney, I agree with you on a lot of what you said. Um I also wanted to add if you remember over by Knobska
Lighthouse, I won't say the house number, there's a big project that we did over there and we put about 300 rows of Virginiaiana in and they have thrived. I don't think there's a windier spot on Cape Cod. Um, there's another one over by the mouth of Green Harbor.
Same thing. They've done really well. Rosa also does. So, I'm not saying it's it's a bad plant. I'm just saying I we were offering something native that has a lot of rose hips um that provides food
and shelter. And I didn't want to deviate from having a mix of native and non-native. I wanted to just do all one way or not. And the other thing I think that we all we all agree it was a significant
violation and we're going to replant that lawn. I don't I don't want to diminish or make it feel like we're not acknowledging that in any way, shape, or form. I got involved in this case at the end of the summer. And so from day one, my plan has been to densely,
you know, reveate the site where we need to have shrubs. And in that process, I wanted to look at the bigger picture. Gee, we have all these non-native invasive vines and what is our best
management practices which I got all the licenses and certifications went to school for to minimize disruption to the resource area once you planted and that was primarily the reason why I was promoting a mechanical removal
because on the chemical treatments you're going to continue human activity into the dune. You're walking through there, you're manually extracting, you're cutting, you're painting. If there's nesting native song birds, there's piping clovers. It's just >> no piping clovers over here.
>> Yeah. I'm I'm just using >> Yeah, Maria. And and I'm sorry to interrupt you, but you know, we've gone along a long time here. >> I I'm not saying that that Rosa Virginia isn't an appropriate plant. Yeah. But I
would also point out to you that it spreads the same way as Rosa Rigosa does. Uh and I can I pull it out on my lawn where it isn't supposed to be. >> So you know um what I'm I'm more of if it ain't broke don't fix it of
philosophy. And I think you know Rosarosa is not it may be invasive because it came from China in 1786 or whenever but on the other hand it's to me not every invasive is by definition
bad you know. Um, so you know, I just think we need to I think I worry about the dam the the destabilizing effect of a wholesale removal of vegetation and replanting of that dune versus leaving
it alone is really the underlying message there. Is there any other are there any other comments? Are there anything in the chat? >> There are a couple of things in the chat, Mr. Chairman. Yeah. >> Um, let me get over there. Um,
so from Ann Carlyiano. I'm sorry if I mispronounced your name. My name is an last name 147 Westwood Rose. Please note, Judge V. They land court judge has been involved in the Shoreway use in
access. Please review his rulings prior to allowing any changes to the Shoreway. I have been involved with the lawsuits. Please note the Martins do not own the Shoreway. Boardman family owned Shoreway 1 through six. The seventh Shoreway is different.
Um please note all deed Nene neck membered not just members of the association. um from a Michael Anastasia um at 35 Westwood, I believe, right across the road. Um he would like to raise some
concerns. Uh Mr. Anastasia, if you raise your hand, I can promote you to a panelist and then you can address your concerns. Um back to 147 uh Westwood. Um, all data members need
to be notified, not just the associations. So, a lot of the comments have to do with the use of the shoreway. Um, but again, that is a legal uh a legal thing. Uh, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Anastasia is a
director of butter. He has his hand raised and would like to um address the board. >> Okay. >> May I promote? >> Yes, you may promote him. >> Okay. I'm promoting Mr. Anastasia. uh rep believe representing the property owner um Diana Diana Anastasia at 35
Westwood. >> Okay. I see you're up here, Mr. Anastasia. Show us your face and um so on. Okay. Before we start, I just want to remind
you that you know the focus of your comments should be on the conservation related issues of the bylaw and so on. The questions of legal access, I will respectfully
shut you down, so to speak. Okay, you're on. >> Fair enough. I'm probably about to be shut down because that was the uh the majority of my uh rebuttal, but uh I my attorney disagrees with Mr. Wall's interpretation and I just wanted to let
the board or uh let everyone know that there are competing interpretations of the law. Also, I think it's a mischaracterization to say that the association has the right to sign off on uh on the plan where we're not a modern
style HOA. There's no real power in that organization other than uh who gets to use the dock and the beach. So, to say that we are capable of signing off that each of the 115 property owners would
need to sign off on that. So, I understand this is legal. Yeah, >> I I get that. And again, those are concerns that are of a legal nature. Uh we have no
interest in or uh control over how you your bylaws or how they're enforced or not enforced. And and so to get that wrapped into this um hearing just simply confuses issues. And I appreciate your
concerns. That's not I'm not setting aside the and saying your concerns aren't real. That in your mind they're very real. I can't make that judgment. Okay. So, do you have anything else that's relevant to the plantings and the
like? And Jen, I see you have your hand up, but >> yeah, I just I wanted Mr. Excuse me. I just want to say that we did receive correspondence from Mr. Anastasia's attorney and that will be part of the correspondence we'll be sending to the board tomorrow regarding
Shoreway ownership access and all of that. We are going to send you his attorney's letter as well. >> Okay, >> we have but we'll send it again again. It's been a while >> and it's, you know, please understand, Mr. Anastasia, I'm not trying to shut
you down. You may have a very legitimate issue. It's just that we it's not within our jurisdiction and so we're not competent to really pass on it one way or another, you know. Um but if you have some
something you want to speak to as far as things like Rose or AOSA, you're at you can have at it. >> Uh well, no, Mr. Chairman, the we have issue with some of the selection of those trees that are going to be planted
along the property line. While the the argument is being made that what they're taking out is grows so high, so wide, some of the trees that they're planting are talking could possibly grow up to 70 ft high, 25 to 50 ft wide. All this will
be on the shoreway and ultimately become the problem of the association. So those were my concerns. uh the rest of it seems to fall under the ospices of legal >> and I think sir that's a fair enough concern and I think that's something that um again we can't control how tall
a tree grows. However, you can you can be you can speak to your the people that are involved in this situation and negotiate something that's acceptable to everybody. Okay, >> Courtney. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yeah, Courtney,
>> there's not any trees being planted in the shoreway if you look at the planting plan. >> And there's no trees being planted right along the edge of the found border. >> Not >> there are, Courtney. >> There are there are multiple trees on the on the edge of the shoreway
>> in line with the um shed. And I met with your mom actually and it had explained what we're doing is swapping out vegetation on the native shrubs. So the shrubs are about 3 to 4 feet in height at maturity. >> So it won't impact her viewfield in that
20 ft. >> You mischaracterized what you said to my mother. So we don't need to get into that. >> Okay. So have you have have is is your question answered, sir? >> Yes, it is. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
>> All right. Any other comments from the board? I appreciate your comments, Michael. It's just and I I don't mean to cut you off but you know we got to kind of stick to where we our jurisdiction is. Okay. >> Understood, sir. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Um any other comments? Do we have a continuence in this? Is that >> there's another hand raised? >> Um there was another chat just to clarify that there are trees along the edge of the shoreway. I'm looking at the
plan. two, four, six, eight are planted along the northern edge of the shoreway. >> And those trees are left to grow to their left to their own devices. >> Yeah. And and we have we have concerns with some of the species of the trees. Um we just don't think they're
appropriate for that area, but we'll be speaking with uh the project team. There is another chat. Mr. Chairman Eric Savage would like to speak on the association's view.
Um, let me go get you, Mr. Savage. I'm promoting Eric Savage of the association um to present the associations for you. >> Yes. Hi, Eric. Thank you. >> Eric Savage. I'm a director on the
Nisnick Association board. Um I have had an opportunity to meet with um uh the occupant and Maria. Um what I wanted to clarify on what we are proposing. We have met what we are okay with is the
removal of the invasive species on the shoreway. So those Russian olives that are there, we are very comfortable with the removal of those and the replanting of the appropriate native species. So that's what our letter states and that's what
we're comfortable doing. Um, our only ask an association is access to the beach cannot be compromised and based on the comp the current plan it as the Martins and Maria Hickeyi have put forward we do not see that as a that is
an issue as long as that access remains. We have no concerns how what plants get planted we don't want trees obviously how it gets removed mechanical or not we don't care. Um, we definitely are in support of removal of
the invasive species. So, that was my two I just want to make sure you understood the association's perspective. >> Thank you, Mr. >> Erica. Can I ask you a question? >> You sure can. >> Uh, the the passageway there, is that owned by the association or is it that
it's a right of way and the property lines actually extend to the middle? 117 homes have deeded rights to access the one through six shoreways. So we all in our deeds have access to the beach. So shoreway number three that that is in
question. Every member has access to use that and that needs to remain open and not blocked for our access to the water. >> Yeah. And so in other words, what I'm trying to get at is is the is the property line is it an easement or is
that simply a um a passageway which is in common land. >> We we have an easement right to the water. Um what is still in question to the point is we have never taken to court shorways one through six on
ownership. The only lawsuit has happened is choice 7. So we don't get we all we care about is an association that is people have their easement rights honored and can access the water. >> Yeah. >> So it's it's a pass and repass. That's it. >> Okay. >> Well, you know, good luck. And I you
know, as long as you guys are comfortable with what they're doing isn't impeding that, that's fine. And that's for you guys to address. It's outside of our jurisdiction. And that's completely which is why my comments are we're comfortable with the removal of
the invasive species and the replanting and as Maria and the Martins have shared that will not impede anyone's access to the water which is we're comfortable with. >> Thank you Eric. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Are there any other comments? >> So where are we now? Are we ready for a
continuence or closure? >> So Mr. Chairman if I may obviously we heard the feedback from the commission. So, I would definitely like to be asking for a continuence, but if I may beg your indulgence, just before I turn it over for that motion and a vote, um, I don't
want to leave until the next time. All the time that's going to go by between now and the next hearing, just want to make two very quick comments. One is there's no doubt this is a violation situation, but I do want to make the distinction that this is not an enforcement hearing. the Martins have voluntarily filed the notice of intent
and are trying to work with staff and the commission um to try to resolve that. Now, we do have some disagreements, but I think we can all agree that there's a good faith effort here to try to resolve this problem. And the second thing is is I don't see our position as bargaining with the
commission. What we see it as is the following. There could be strict compliance with your regulation which as I mentioned in my presentation would involve planting the unpermitted cleared area, planting the lawn and that's it. What we're trying to propose here
thematically is proposing much more extensive management of the property so that at the end of the day it's qualitatively better for the environment. That's what that's what our theme is and I'd like to kind of leave off with that and ask the commission for
a continuence. And having said that, Jen, what do you suggest? Um I I obviously we don't want a two or 3 week we have to deal with some plan revisions and some additional information. So can we have a fair amount of time to to review things and and submit some new
information? >> And as you know, it's also Christmas and New Year's and Super Bowl other things, >> right? Absolutely, Courtney. Absolutely. >> Um, >> my birthday, too. >> Well, happy birthday, Steve.
>> Happy birthday, Steve. >> Mine's coming up. >> Christmas, baby. Stick together. >> I I would suggest maybe towards the end of January. Um, >> that that's what I'm thinking, Brian. But I'm looking at what we got going on.
Uh, what we have continued to that. >> Yeah. Um, >> and while Jennifer, >> I I'd say if we do continue it to the 21st that I would only take one additional continuence, Courtney,
because two of the one two um two of the continuances on the 21st haven't been opened and they're going to be fairly complicated. So, we could continue this to the 21st
>> and see how much headway we can make on a staff level working with Brian's project team. Um, that means everything would have to be in on the 7th. Brian, I mean, I'm sorry, the 14th. That means we would need to meet with
your >> Can I interrupt for one second, Jen? >> Yeah. Yeah, I'm I'm thinking that as Courtney noted, um you know, next week it's Christmas Eve and then New Year's Eve. Um that that really only really gives us about a week >> week.
>> Yeah. H how about um maybe the 28th or the first meeting in February? >> We're not meeting on the 28th and coincidentally that is my birthday. Um but that is not the reason we're taking it off. Um, >> it should be, >> but um, the fourth I would think would
be better off for all of us, Brian. It was just when I was looking through the calendar, we were just getting we were getting pinched. >> I'm just thinking that with vacations and time off over the holidays, we're going to we're going to lose those two weeks and >> Yeah, I think the fourth is fine and I'm comfortable with that. We're going to need some time with this one.
>> We'd ask to the fourth. Um, Mr. chairman. >> That's good. And I to be honest, to be honest with you, uh I think you guys had need to have time with staff to work out the particulars of it because I honestly
much as I enjoy debating Maria on the glories of Rosa Vosa versus Rosa Virginia. I don't I think if we can avoid that and just get that request make a motion to continue the hearing until February 4th, 2026. Driscoll
>> Bman second. >> Do we have a second? >> Bman second. >> Okay, we have a motion, a second to continue this till the 4th of February, 2026. All right. Uh I'll start with Jim
McGrath. >> McGrath I. >> And Ron Bowman. >> Bowman. I >> David Kent. Kent I. And >> uh uh Ron Driscoll. Chris Eye >> and Bill Duffy. >> Duffy eye.
>> And Steve Patton. >> Patton eye. >> Have I miss anybody other than myself? >> No. >> Then bird eye. Okay. The motion is continued to the fourth. Enjoy your holidays. No coal for this crew on this
one. Um enjoy the holidays. Enjoy warm up to the Super Bowl and we'll see you on the fourth. >> Go Patriots. Merry Christmas everyone. Thank you for your time tonight. >> Merry Christmas. >> Night Maria. Night Brian. Night Jake. Happy holidays.
>> You too. >> Moving along. We um >> Uh >> oh. >> We have a question. >> Hang Courtney. Give me one second. I got to move some people out of the meeting. And I think I just booted one of our commissioners off. Oh, wait a minute. I
got Steve. I got Hang on. Who did I boot back into this? Nope. I think I have all of you. Steve, Jim, Bill, Ron, Ronnie, Dave, Courtney. I have everybody. Okay. Sorry. When everybody starts to move,
everything jumps around and sometimes I >> the same thing. Okay. >> Okay. >> Moving along. We are getting to um uh request to amend an existing order of conditions. And this is a new one. It's
not continued. So, it's uh Kim Kim Sierin, I believe I'm mangled that pronunciation and I apologize. 24 Edgewater Drive East, East Balmouth, Mass. Request to amend the order of
conditions for Mass D254981 to regrade at a portion of the backyard and install retaining walls. Who is on? >> Mr. >> Yeah, Mr. Mr. Chairman, I've promoted Brad Berto from JC Engineering to present his project. Good evening, Brad.
How are you? >> Brad, you need to >> Sorry. >> Sorry. Good evening. Uh for the record, Brad Berto with JC Engineering on behalf of the applicant. Uh this project to remind the commission or
notify the commission uh included original the original permit was to tear down and rebuild a single family dwelling. Uh a sizable portion of this property is within the zone A and was
developed with the house, concrete pad, uh some retaining walls, a lot of crushed stone areas, uh and very minimal vegetation between the existing house and the bulkhead down by the salt salt marsh.
So, we've been in contact with staff this past year earlier earlier this year regarding some some wishes of the uh property owner and we were authorized to move
forward. Then we held back uh were told to stop and then recently uh we are moving forward to request an amendment as was the staff's requirement when we uh submitted a draft plan. It
was a while ago. Might have been February of of 2025. Uh so we were not aware that work took place uh until uh pretty much the day before we were going to go stake out the
location of some proposed retaining walls uh that were part of the original uh this this amended order of conditions to to give a brief uh history of what the property looked like before
construction. I will uh share my screen if I may. So this this is uh uh kind of facing the water facing east and I'm going to go through a just a series of slides to show you what the
site looked like. And there was the old house that was removed uh and reconstructed uh under the uh proposed plan. I'm just make note as you can see on my cursor. I hopefully you can see my cursor.
Um this is this is the uh back of the ex house that was constructed. This house once I show you the site plan is at a quite obscure angle with the boundary lines. So we had rotated it and
now parallel with boundary lines. So, uh, you know, one corner of the new house started pretty much where the corner of the old house was and ran at an angle across the concrete pad and and over this this deck area. So, just guys,
so you have an understanding of what we're looking at. Uh, as part of the project, we had a a number of these areas uh proposed to be reveated. currently as you can see is the number
of grass moss uh existing pathway that uh was originally proposed to uh maintain as is. I'll go over that change uh once I brought the plan up. And uh again
uh a lot of grass areas either side of this path is a couple uh rip wrap areas that are kind of support the bank. as you can see is a pretty decent drop in elevation. And as part of this amendment, since I have this picture up,
we were not originally planning to take out these three shrubs. We had the erosion control just around it. Uh obviously, if you've been to the site, these three shrubs were removed. So,
if I could move on to the plan. This was the the plan that was permitted um I guess earlier or late last year. The date uh July of last of last year. Uh you can
see the original footprint of the old house, the new house. Um proposed walkway down the side and You can see the proposed grading is is relatively steep, closed contours. Maybe
it was an oversight on me that maybe I should have proposed some steps or or retaining walls or something to terrace this walkway to make it a little easier to to uh walk down. Uh but we're here before you tonight to to request that
change. Uh again, this was the original limit of work. uh we had proposed four trees to be removed. Those trees are shown in this picture here. One, two, three, four. Right in this area. So, we were planting
four trees um in this location. Uh again, species type was all recommended by staff and um this area shown in green hatch was the
mitigation. I believe it was 440 square ft uh to account for the the 400 square ft required and that was a mix of uh Bear Berry uh let me just Bayberry Beach Plum and Virginia Rose. If you'd like me to
add some Rosa Regoza I could do that. Um so this was the permitted plan. Uh it's the site's almost done. Um, the property owner kind of got sold, the original applicant, still the applicant,
the original builder of the house, still the builder, but they sold the property into in in between construction. So, there's now a new property owner that that completed this work that you may have seen uh on site. So, there was a
third party involved that uh we were unaware of. And to get to the proposed plan, I have highlighted in magenta the location of the walls. We went out as opposed to staking out the location of the proposed walls, we went out located
the existing walls. Those are shown in magenta. Uh we also notice that um the house plans, I think originally had one door that was under the deck. This is a walkout basement. uh they built two two exit points. So
there was a a granite stoop that that was constructed to exit that door and and drop down three rises and there was one underneath the deck. uh the pathway that um I have highlighted here which was
supposed to be rebuilt because the original stairway I mean the uh the original pathways in this location uh they they constructed a proposed uh
uh a stairwell in the location kind of lines up with the existing pier and Uh they also constructed one of the terrace and steps on the southside in the in the red uh red color maroon
color. Uh these are the proposed areas that the applicant uh besides requesting commission permission or permit to maintain these walls, we're looking to amend to allow the construction of these
new areas. Um this there's still a path proposed in this location um as originally permitted, but with the inclusion of these steps and terrace, it allows for a more comfortable walking surface uh down
the side of the of the the property. Uh grades in the front yard around elevation 25. Uh the grades in the backyard are about 16 and a half or so. The original permitted plans was 17. So they were
they were pretty or 16. So they're pretty close to where grades were originally proposed uh or originally permitted I should say. uh because this additional
retaining wall uh and I have some pictures from the application here is it's a stone and in mortar wall uh that um was built pretty much in uh
it's pretty much in the location of the original work limit uh as part of the site uh a house construction We we obviously had uh permission to alter land on this side for the
mitigation. Um there is what appears obviously more disturbed areas beyond the original footprint, but as part of this new application, we're proposing to provide more mitigation.
Again, uh this is the existing uh walkway. couple different views. Um, and then an overall view across the back. Uh, kind of see the granite stoop and granite steps.
So, we we we looked at the the calculations. It does it does provide uh some additional square footage of imperous areas. The wall itself's about 15 inches wide.
Uh and what's with this hatched area is about a 100 square feet proposed um in this area. Obviously the the purpose of these walls were was to level off the backyard. If I pull up the
permitted plan, you can you can see that it we're trying to maintain the slopes on the old plan 13 14 15 16 and and you can tell it's it's got a a decent slope uh on the property and I think it was
the the property owner's wishes to to kind of have a level area along the the water side of his house. And you know granted the leveler area would you know slow runoff um as because it has less
pitch allow for more infiltration um to account for that additional 100 square feet and I'm I'm assuming that you see my screen as I move back and forth. Is that >> okay? So account for that additional 100
square ft. And due to the area between the original mitigation line and the original work limit being altered or there being sand moved there and then pulled back. We are
proposing to mitigate that area and replant just expand it. So originally it was 440 square feet. We're going to add 500 square ft or proposing 500 square ft increases it to 940 square ft. Um we're
maintaining the same planting uh frequency 3 ft on center shrubs. uh taking into account your average spacing, that's about 105 shrubs uh planted uh using the same species,
Bayberry, beach plum, and Virginia rose. Uh again, we're uh trying to address a violation that was originally proposed and uh obviously at the mercy of the commission. We we we we know there's
there's more square footage 100 square feet uh I guess of retaining wall if that's considered a structure under the bylaw >> then um I believe that you know the additional 500 square ft of vegetation
and swapping out from kind of grassy areas to vegetation uh would would would greatly benefit uh the salt marsh. And due to due to the time tonight, I'll I'll cut my uh meeting short uh or my
presentation to allow the uh commissioner uh excuse me, sorry. Um allow the commission to uh ask any questions or deliberate. Um I'd be happy to answer any questions you may have.
>> All right. Thank you. Um, before I turn this to Jen, I I need to make a comment here. I've I have great concerns about this project and I'm speaking to my fellow commissioners. That is that in the within the last
year, we've got three projects in which we've gotten unpermitted walls or walls weren't built according to the plans. And I think we have to be as a commission very careful about how we deliberate on these things
because we could we could set some very uh unfortunate precedents. I've been on this commission for um more than 20 years and I've seen a number of situations where we kind of felt too bad
sorry for the land owner and we we kind of forgot our duties and it came back to bite us in the you know what and I think we've got to be very careful about how we decide on these wall structures
because we're looking at three of from the last year. One is in lawsuit right now. So that's my only comment. I'm sorry, Jen. It's your turn. >> It's okay, Mr. Chairman. Um, thank you, Brad. Um,
some just housekeeping comments. Last during the original project, we mentioned um there's some deficiency on the dock permitting um documents. That has not been addressed yet. Not quite sure if the old owner has passed that along to the new owner, but if you could pass the deficiencies along to the new
owner, that would be great. Um, there does seem to be a lack of local permits for the dock. >> Yeah, we are in the process of preparing plans. >> Perfect. Thank you. We just want to make sure it's permitted and so 10 years from
now, a new me or a new Alyssa doesn't go back into this project and say, "Why isn't this dock permitted?" So, we're just looking to clean up the permitting of the dock. >> Um, no, you know, we'll work with you on the
plantings and the appropriate um um percentage of each plantings. Um, I do I do have concerns with the wall. I don't have concerns with the the the
steps going down. You had a pretty steep grade when we originally looked at this. Probably should have incorporated some steps. So, I have no issues with the steps. What is that? On the south side of the house. Um, but I I do I do have
some concerns with that retaining wall and and bringing in the fill and flattening out that area. Um um so I I don't think I can it can support the the the retaining wall with
the steps between between the house and and the salt marsh, but definitely can support the walkways and the steps along the um south side of that house. Um, part of that wall is sitting right on top of the coastal bank and it it
literally almost is on top of the coastal bank and in the in that a buffer to the coastal bank and um do you know how much fill was brought on because it went it looks like it was raised three feet to kind of flatten it out in that area. Do you know
if they just moved some fill around when they were digging out the >> Yeah, I Yeah, definitely excess fill on the site from from excavating the >> So, they just put it in the back and flattened it out. >> Yeah. And yeah, as you can see on Well, I don't have the plan
uh shown. Uh the grades are proposed to be about 15.8. I'll just bring it up. >> Yeah. And on the original plan it was between 12 and 13. >> 13 at the location of the of the wall.
>> Yeah. So it came up about almost 3 ft cuz I think right around that was contour 13. Yeah. >> Y >> the 13T contour. Now we're at 158. So >> and it was >> Yeah, that's that's at the high end and and then it tapered to to nothing. So it
was, you know, not three feet consistently. It was 3 ft down to nothing over that at I guess maybe uh 15 ft. Uh I think overall I believe it's about 20 ft from from foundation wall to
uh retaining wall or face of retaining wall. So >> yeah, >> just to clarify that. >> Yeah, it's unfortunate that the property owner started construction prior to getting approval. Um, there may be some consequences to that, but we'll see what
the board says. I don't mind shifting the walkway from where it was originally permitted to more central if that makes more sense to the new owner to access the dock. We're fine with kind of
shifting that um kind of north in line with where you show it. Um, but definitely I do have concerns with the wall and and the um um the movement of um excess material and uh all over that
site. That's all. Mr. Chairman, >> thank you. Uh Alyssa, >> nothing to add at this time. >> Okay. So, we're ready for commissioner comments. I'll start with Ron Driscoll. >> Yeah, I have the same concerns. I mean,
we just can't let that wall go closer to the resource, especially unpermitted and you're flattened out on Coastal Bank. I I as much as I like to say it's a beautiful wall and it really helps property, we just can't permit it and I don't think it should be allowed. >> I just want to clarify, we didn't do
work. We didn't flatten out the coastal bank with that. We're we're landward. >> We had some right around the >> We're landward of the top of Coastal Bank. Thank you, Ron. Anything else? >> Stand corrected, but um I'm still
against the wall. That's all. Thank you. >> Uh Ron Bulma, you're muted. >> Thank you, Brad. Uh yeah, it looks like the cat got put in front of the horse on this here. Um and I got to kind of agree
with staff and Ron Driscoll. >> Okay. Jim, um I uh I echo uh Ronnie's statement as well. I'm going to defer to staff on this. I don't I don't think the uh the
wall is going to work, >> right, Steve Patton? >> I'm um agreeing with the other comments earlier. Thank you, >> Bill Duffy.
Yeah, I'm on the same boat. Like your opening comment to this. All three enforcement hearings that we have after this are about the same issue of retaining walls being put in closer to the So, um the good thing about it is um
contrary to what some other people say, the the commissioners will uh the commission will work with uh the homeowner to get whatever they can get permitted. Um but not um that wall probably have to come down. Um, so that's my comment on this. So I'm pretty
much agreeing with everybody else. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh, David Brian, um, this property sold recently, is that correct? During this past year? >> Yeah, within the past year. Yeah. >> So, the work that we're discussing here
in the wall, etc. that was done by the previous owner. >> No, the the new the new owner. >> The new owner did do this. >> Yeah. So, we're >> Okay. the the the person that obtained the permit is the applicant and the which happens to be, you know, related
to the property owner. Okay. >> Uh significant other, they they're still responsible for the permits and completing the construction. So, >> uh >> I I just have one more question. Um the original the older plan you showed us did have mitigation. Um that all that
all that other previous mitigation is now gone. Is that correct? And I'm wondering when and why if I There was the mitigation hasn't started. >> But but I mean the the older plan had a mitigation area, didn't it? Down near the water.
>> That was an area to be planted. >> Oh. Well, it was never it was never done. >> It had they hadn't gotten that point yet. >> Okay. All right. Okay. >> Dave, the project's not completed yet, so they're waiting. Yeah, they're going to probably plant that in the spring. >> I got you. Thank you. That's all that's
all I have. >> Okay. Have I covered everybody? So, I've already made my comments. I don't think I need to repeat myself, but I just simply this is a concern I have and we have to be very careful as a commission.
Uh, and I know that sometimes making tough decisions like this are is not very, you know, easy because sometimes the people that you're dealing with are your neighbors. But, you know what? That's our job. And you know, you all
have been parents at one time or another and have had to say no to your kids. So that's where we are. All right. >> Thank you, Courtney. >> I What's that? >> I just said thank you. >> Yeah. So, do we have any other any other comments from the commission? What's our
pleasure? >> If Well, if you may, I I I understand where the I where the board is or the commission's uh thoughts are. Um, again, I did reach out to staff, you know, in
February, they said file an amendment. Um, I would hope that they would have expressed their concerns at that time. Um, but we move forward with the process. Um, if if if you would allow, I would like
to discuss the your comments with the applicant and maybe submit a revised plan. Um, >> no. We we you know, it's not you have to understand, sir,
that we're not trying to be uh unpleasant or nasty or whatever to you, but it's it we have a regulation and these regulations require that you need to get permission to do this stuff first. >> And Courtney, he's going to talk to his
client. So, Brad, how long do you need to do a um have um a continuence for? >> Uh well, obviously uh it wouldn't take long. If there were was space available in January, that's that would be fine. I
>> Okay, I have space. This one, I mean, if you like, like I said, I can completely support the walkway along the side and everything. That was pretty steep. Um the wall would just we were struggling with um >> uh Is the 14th too soon for you or would
you prefer the 21st? >> Uh 14th. So I'd have to have a plan in by the 7th. >> Correct. >> That's fine. I can make that work. >> Okay, we'll have you on the 14th, Brad. >> Okay.
>> So, I need a motion to continue this. >> Trying to make a motion. I'm Go ahead. To the applicant, we please continue the hearing until January 14th, 26. Driscoll. >> Thank you, sir. And we have a second >> second. >> Okay. We have a motion and a second to
continue this until when? >> January 14th. >> January 14th, 2026. So, Jim McGrath, >> McGrath I, >> Ron Bowman, >> Bowman, I. >> Ron Driscoll,
>> Driscoll, I. >> Bill Duffy, >> Duffy, I. Steve Patton >> Patton I >> David Kent >> Kent I >> and Bird I Anybody I missed? Okay, so this meeting is continued. All right,
moving along. Thank you. >> Thank you, Brad. >> Thanks. Happy holidays. >> You too. >> Okay, next um we have uh continued hearings under an enforcement area
order. Uh the first one is um I'm sorry there was a request for a certificate of compliance and which is uh Timothy Lem and that's been >> Have we voted to continue? >> Yes, you voted to continue this until January 14th. >> Okay. I just want to make sure we've
done that. Okay. No problem. >> Continued hearing as our enforcement order. Anthony Aveni Jr. Elaine Aveni 42net Drive East Balmouth. Uncommitted reconstruction of the deck, enlargement
of the patio, in installation of it, retaining features, clearing within current conservation uh jurisdiction. So >> yes, Mr. Chairman, this was Mr. Borcelli's project from Falmouth Engineering. Um he is aware that we are
recommending we close this hearing, issue an enforcement order for corrective action to be filed. uh corrective action, sorry, to be filed by a notice of intent by January 30th. I've already talked to Mike about the time frames from this and he's fine with that
time frame. So, what you would do is you would issue an enforcement order requiring the filing of a notice of intent to take corrective actions. That will give the staff uh time to work with Mr. Borelli and the Ainis and see what we what needs to be
removed, what may be able to stay and be permitted and work through that process under a notice of intent. >> And this is to all be filed by the 30th of January. >> 30th of January. Uh let me just check that date. Make sure it's the 30th and not that's not a Sunday because that
would probably be my luck. Friday, January 30th. >> Okay. And so our enforcement would instruct uh staff to do what you've just suggested. Is that correct? >> Basically outline what's needed for
corrective action um and and issue that to um to the property owner again to file that notice by January 30th outlining the corrective actions to be taken because they are going to need to be conditioned. >> Okay. So do we have any discussion?
Anybody interested in throwing a question in? If not, I'll look for a motion. >> Duffy. >> So move, Mr. Chairman. >> What's that? >> So moved as as uh spoken by Jennifer. >> Okay,
>> okay, we have a motion and a second to issue an enforcement order as outlined. So I'm calling to call for the roll roll call. Uh Jim McGrath, >> McGrath, I. >> Bill Duffy, >> Duffy, I. Ron Driscoll. >> Driscoll. I
>> David Kent. >> Kent. >> I. >> Ron Bowman. >> Bowman. I >> Steve Patton. >> I. >> Bird. I did. I get Did I miss you, Jim? >> No. >> No. >> We're all good. >> We have issued an enforcement order.
Thank you very much. Let's move on. David and Marcy Barnes 8 38 squib knocket unpermitted construction of retaining walls steps and a patio replacement of decking alteration of a coastal bank and that I believe has been
continued till 121 20 >> correct so we can get a we can get a um >> site plan excuse me >> have we voted that continuence >> yes >> okay moving along next uh Susan and
Maurice Ryan. 32 Squib Knocket Road, East Falmouth. Unpermitted installation of retaining features and hardscape potential regrading of the coastal bank clearing within conservation
um jurisdiction. So, uh Jennifer. >> Yes, Mr. Chairman. Much like 42 Squibnocket, we are recommending since Tom Bunker was here with his plan last week, we are um recommending we close
this. We issue an enforcement order requiring the filing of a notice of intent by January 30th to take corrective actions. I do believe the property owner is working with both Tom Bunker of BSS Design and Mark Manganelo of LEC who will be assisting them with
the restoration process. >> Great. So we need a motion to that effect. >> Duffy. So moved. >> Do I have a second? >> That and a second. >> Okay, we have a motion and a second to issue an enforcement order as discussed. Are there any other comments or anything
in the in the chat function hearing? None. I'll I'll call for the vote. Uh Jim McGrath >> McGrath I >> uh David Kent >> Kent I. >> Bill Duffy >> Duffy I. Don Driscoll. >> Driscoll. I
>> Steve Patton. >> Patton I. >> Ron Bowman. >> Bowman. I. >> Did I get you, David? >> You did. >> Okay. And Bird I. Okay. Motion carried. We issued an enforcement order. Let's move on to voting orders of conditions.
Uh Karen CHES 20 uh Nichols Road, East Falmouth, Mass. >> This is a fiber roll array project. uh presented by Collie site services. Um I think the only thing we need to work
with them on is protection of the salt marsh if they are going to come down that original access point. But I do believe Alyssa, did we receive a revised plan from Bill with different construction access points? I know we spoke about working with Bill um and the
contractor, which I do believe, don't quote me, is going to be Mscowski. um working with them in the field to find a more appropriate access path. >> Yeah, I believe the original project um proposed one but utilized two paths. Um
our only concern is the one to the I don't have the plan up on the far side of the project. There is some Thank you. struggling salt marsh there. So, as long as they matted, it should um rebound. They need to walk over it. Um, we did get revised plans for the hearing last week that did address our concerns with
um, you know, the labeling and the buffer and the um, stamps and all that. So, they're good to go. >> Okay. Any other comments? I'll entertain a motion. >> A motion to issue a order of conditions as discussed. Driscoll. >> Okay. Do we have a second?
>> Bman second. >> Second. >> Any further discussion? Hearing none, I'll call for the vote. Jim McGrath. >> McGrath. I >> uh David Kent >> Kent I >> uh Bill Duffy >> Duffy I >> Ron Driscoll >> Driscoll I
>> Steve Patton I >> Ron Bowman >> Bowman I >> did I get you David? >> Yes you did. All right. And bird eye motion carried. We haven't issued an order of conditions. Next vote amended
order of conditions and that is uh constant Ryan 151 Ticket Path Falmouth Mass. >> We just lost my colleague. >> What's that? >> I don't know where she went. Melissa
just disappeared. This is the bubble >> extension of the revetment with some soft solution. Um it originally was a much softer uh approach to um stabilizing that area.
Uh unfortunately um um hang on she's um unfortunately there's been they didn't undertake the project right away and there have been
some serious alterations to the site which is going to require Yes. I'm still struggling with this one guys. I don't like rock revetments for a number of reasons. There's a lot of
um effects with these types of structures. I really am concerned with that little barrier island to the west um and possible um possible um adverse effects to the
salt marsh behind that little barrier island. It is not a very wide barrier island. Um, I'm concerned about the deflection of the waves from that to
the west. Um, if you were to permit it, permitting these types of structures usually requires beach nourishment component because you're starving the system of the natural replenishment of sand from these
types of structures. Um, in this case, we have a problem with the channel going from Great Pond to Perch Pond, sholing in and affecting the navigational access from Perch Pond
and to Great Pond. The residents of Perch Pond have attempted twice to get that dredged and have been um because of the concerns of division of marine fisheries have not been able to do that. So adding sand to this
system to mitigate for that wall is not going to work because the sand's going to end up in Perch Pond. That said, there has to be some sort of monitoring component because I really am concerned with that
marsh and um I'd say we come up with some sort of monitoring requirements about the width of the beach and you know attempt to take corrective action at that time if we do see some
adverse effects happening in that area. Um, so those are my my comments and my concerns with this project. >> May I ask a question, Jen? In Sure. >> your mind, is this uh rise to the level
of a denial? >> No, but I'd like to see less rock. >> Um, yeah. Um, >> it's a hard one because I mean we they had a plan, they didn't implement the plan and the site conditions changed
drastically. >> Yeah. >> So, it's a it's a tough one for us. It really is. >> Okay. You had your hand up, Ron. >> Yeah. Um, I know that there's a rock wall already there, Revetland already there, and we're just extending it. Is there any way and you're worried about the waves hitting that rock
at the angle and then going over to the marsh? So is there any way you put those to stones in so that they break up break up the waves to go so it won't go in that direction >> if yeah
>> I mean that could be done field right >> yeah there is a revetment there and you have to understand if you look at the that entire shoreline it's revetted revetted revetted and then there's one property that did the core fiber rolls and that and that property is pretty stable um and revetted and actually when
they tried to fill in that gap under this concept 20 years ago called gap theory. It was actually denied by the state. The state made them put in the core fiber rollers and everything. This, you know, when it was originally proposed, I know that uh some of the
former commissioners had some concerns cuz it was the riv that mint and then the core fiber rolls and then we were trying like to to grade it so it was it would absorb that wave energy a little bit more than just deflecting it. But it is scarped out so much that e even
though they're they're putting in they they say less rock cuz it's it's not as deep. And I think that's what our confusion was in the in the field is we didn't realize they were going to backfill this whole thing with rock. So
now they're just placing it there. I mean the board closed the hearing. We don't have a plan change. I am concerned with the deflection of that wave action towards Perch Pond, towards the mouth of Perch Pond and
towards where it tapers off and then you have that very narrow barrier beach in front of that salt marsh. But then if we do start to see effects, how do we mitigate for them? How are
they going to mitigate for the effects if we do start seeing them through monitoring reports at beaches eroding and eroding and eroding and all of a sudden it'll break through to that march? I I I don't know. Uh let me check one thing. So anyway, th those are my
concerns. I mean, like I said, any sort of revetment project like this should have a beach nourishment component. And and in this particular
this one particular location in Falmouth, I couldn't support that because of the problems we have with the channel um going into Perch Pond and the and the and the um the sholing that happens there.
Let me take one quick look. I'm almost there. So that who owns this? So who owns this? >> While you're finding that out, Jen, if we were to deny it, what are we telling
them? What are they? >> We have to do some I mean it's it it's not so I mean this is an amendment. So you already approved something over there. >> Yeah. >> So you would have to allow something
else. So you could you could deny this revment. They're going to have to redesign it because their original design is just not going to fit the current site conditions. Um or we asked them to just put less
less stone and more fiber rolls. Um I just I don't think this hearing should have been should have been closed. There were too many questions. Um but here we are. Um >> uh
>> can we can we condition it to change the thing that much? In other words, they've they they've came in and told us how they wanted all this hardscape. I'll get to you in a minute, Ron. Um told us how we're you
know they want to put all this hardcape in and we listened to it and we closed it. So, you know, now we're confronted. We if we have second thoughts, you know, how how do we the only way I
concede to if we if our thoughts are second thoughts are serious enough, then we really have to deny it. >> Yeah, but they got to do something and it's going to require them another plan change. I mean, the beach I don't know how much is a roadback. Is
it It's like a 25 foot wide beach. >> Yeah. between between the great pond and that marsh in the back. I mean, I think we're just going to have to end up putting some type of monitoring requirements on it. >> Yeah. >> Um,
>> yeah, >> he pan's a private road, so you know, we would think that each of the budding properties owned to the center line. That would bring that down to here. Um,
Ron, you had your hand up while you're >> Yeah. I mean, >> there's some there's quite a bit of erosion there on that bank and something's got to be done to resolve this that the the property owner has a right to protect their property.
I'm not sold on the wave. The waves, you're inside the breakwater there. So, how much wave action and and sands moving? That's a debate. So, I think we should hear from the rest of the commissioners before we start going in the wrong direction.
>> Okay, Jen, are you done? Because I'd like to >> Yeah. >> Oh, okay. >> I have my piece. >> Okay. I'm going to start around the table. David Ken. >> Yeah. Um kind of what Ronnie said. I want to ask Jen a question. Um, what about the orientation and things here in
this site makes you quite confident that wave action will be shifted toward Purge Pond? I mean, it could be other direction. >> It could be. >> I mean, is there something about the layout things we've seen which makes you makes you believe that's going to happen or what where does your concern come from?
>> It just it's just a concern. I mean, that area behind there is vulnerable. And if the wave action were to be deflected, I'm not saying it's going to be, but if it were to be deflected in that area, >> what happens? We're just moving the energy down the system. That's what
these walls do. All they do is move whatever energy is hitting them down down the system. >> So although that now that property is protected, the unprotected properties are going to be adversely affected. It happens >> toward
>> toward Purge Pond though or I mean it's going to be that direction >> that that I I don't know for sure Dave I don't know for sure say definitely but I can't say it won't >> but one thing Ronnie just said is it's definitely a need to protect that property and protect the home. I mean
that's that's a definite >> so protecting the property. You said that right >> two different things technically the house
is 78 ft away from that erosion. >> They're a ways away. Also I the the level of erosion I see there I wonder if we don't use rock. I mean those those flabber rolls aren't going to survive there. That's severe erosion. That's That's severe.
>> I I think we're in a situation where we have the plan. >> We didn't ask for plan revisions, but I would like to see some monitoring. If the board's going to approve this, >> I would like to see some monitoring. >> Okay. >> And then if we start seeing an adverse effect to to that area, we can take
corrective action then. But if we're going to approve it, then I would say that we I I do want some some annual monitoring of that area to make sure that >> that makes sense. >> That that energy is not being just shifted down. >> That makes I have one last question. This is a procedural question. So if we
close a a um order of um close like we did last week, we can't re our hands are kind of tied, Courtney. We we can't really reopen it. Is that procedurally? Is that is that how this works? No, I mean we would have to it it's
close. So this is different. So this is an amendment. Okay. You don't have to accept the amendment and they could come in with a different amendment, but I I don't think there's going to be a tremendous amount of less rock. Maybe a
little bit less rock. Um it's just it's it's the nature of the thing. So is it an amendment? You could >> this thing last this thing last week was >> they know and their only recourse would be to file either another amendment or another notice of intent.
>> So what we closed last week was that a notice of intent we closed. >> You closed an amendment >> a was not a notice of intent. >> Yeah. You closed an amendment to an order of condition. So they're just trying to amend the plan. >> All right.
I say let's add requirements to it >> and we go from there. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> You know, I it's getting late, but real quick, Jen, refresh us on the state regulations about armoring postal banks
versus soft solutions and when a project was built and so forth. >> Well, it it's it's complicated, Courtney. If a house was built pre78 or pre89 in your rags, yes, they can armor
the house to to to protect the house. But when what is protecting the house? If the house is 150 ft away, it doesn't need protection. If it's 80 ft away, it doesn't need protection. When when when
is it protecting the house and not just, >> you know, stopping the >> erosion property? I see trees almost falling into >> Yeah, I understand that, Ronnie, but that that's that that's not what the regulations say. The regulations protect
the beach. These eroding banks provide a sediment source. So, if an eroding coastal bank is providing a sediment source to a coastal beach, then the regulations say no, you cannot armor. It is providing a sediment source to the beach or you have to mitigate for that
sediment source. So that is why the state over the past 20 years has decided to to permit these softer these softer solutions is it is a way to one assist property owners to protecting their
property while also trying to mimic the natural conditions provide sediment source to these beaches without just revetting anything because if you start revetting this entire town you're not going to have any beaches left because you're not going to have a sediment source. I get that. >> So, it's it's a balance.
>> If that whole bag comes down, it's going to go into in Perch Pond anyways. If it's going out there and all the water's going that way, >> I say we just add monitoring requirements and if the wave energy starts to affect, we'll just address we'll we'll figure out how to address it. We're not going to address it at
10:30 tonight. >> I got that. Okay. So, if anybody's, you know, part of the reason why Woodneck Beach, for those of you who know that beach, why it's so rocky is because the sediment source is starved because out where the old Cape Cotter Hotel is, it's
all armored and that's where the sediment came from. So, >> that's out on that's out on on Buzzards Bay. It's a totally different environment inside that I know, but I mean totally different. >> It's the same thing. And what it is is that we starve the sediment sources down
downwind down then then you're going to that's when you have these problems. It's it's for every action there's a reaction and that's the way it is. This is not an easy This is not an easy question to solve because you're dealing with property
owners and you're dealing with, you know, the rights of property owners versus the environment versus the beaches and it's a struggle and we're the ones that have to decide it sadly. So, >> yeah. So, I say just approve the amendment with monitoring.
>> I agree. >> Would you want Alyssa? >> I just wanted to make a clarifying point if that's okay. Okay, I know we're going long. Um I I think the newer commissioners are at a disadvantage because you weren't a part of the original permitting of this process. So the proximity to the home, the type and
um material of the proposed reitment was kind of already discussed. Um so again, the home is nowhere near this. the home is not >> yeah the point of the regulations is to protect the resource areas and that's why it has that particular date of when
homes are built and and the functionality of the bank and where that sediment source goes. You know I I know we've seen a lot of core fiber roll projects that are getting redone and that's because of this sediment source. Um, so there are very nitty-gritty things we're trying to stay in line
with, but I think the point is is something was permitted, it didn't happen. If this gets denied, that original project cannot be implemented. The site's changed far too much. So, you have to approve something >> and and we're at the point where no, we don't know what's going to happen and
no, you can't necessarily permit something in fear of something happening. So, so I think what's being proposed is some kind of combination. Having a monitoring report might be the best way to go at the moment and perhaps
um a clause in there that if something serious occurs, they come back to us. We sort of regroup, figure out where to go from there. Um so again, for the newer folks, you're kind of coming in in the middle of this. So I understand why it's like really confusing, >> confusing. >> Um
>> Alyssa, you're right on. I think we need to vote in order conditions. I think with a monitoring requirement, is there anything else we need to do for better or worse? You know, I'm sure they'll be back in two or three years to amend it
again because it won't work. >> Can I go ahead? >> Commissioners could speak if they want as well. >> What's that? >> There's some other commissioners that haven't spoken that might want to speak as well. I'm not sure, but >> yeah. Well, anybody else want to say anything? Steve?
>> Yes. I wanted to say that I supported it in the the meeting and I knew that when we did this, we had made a commitment to the owner that we were going to discuss this and um finalize it in our meeting tonight
and that's what I intend to do. >> I agree with Jen that we need monitoring, but let's approve this and move forward, please. I'll make a motion if you would like, Mr. Chairman. although others may not have spoken. >> Well, I think Go ahead. We It's We're at that point.
We need a motion to to issue an order of conditions as discussed with a monitoring report. Anything? >> Do you want to also add a preconstruction meeting in the conditions with the contractor? >> Okay. That's not in your standard conditions. Now,
>> yeah, we always do, but I'd like to say it. >> Yeah. It's something we would put in, but I just want you guys to know I'm putting it in. Okay. I'm putting in a pre-construction meeting. >> We do read your conditions once in a while. >> That's particularly critical in in this one. Any other uh do we have a second on
the motion? >> Motion second. Driscoll. >> Okay. So, we are going to vote on motor conditions as discussed. So, Jim McGrath I >> and Steve Patton I >> and Bill Duffy. >> Duffy. I
>> and Ron Driscoll >> Driscoll I >> and Ron Bowman >> Bowman I >> David Kent >> Kent I >> and Bird I I think we covered everybody. All right, let's move on. Voting enforcement order Steven Augusta 33
Oyster Shell Lane East Falmouth. >> So moved. >> Second. Yeah. So, we sent you a draft um because um this isn't as straightforward. We're
trying to um point out other things that were wrong with the property, but um like the grass paver parking driveway thing. But I think in the end, the board should vote the enforcement order that's
drafted, which is going to require Felmouth Engineering to file a notice of intent on behalf of the on behalf of the property owner by February, I think was the 18th. It's like sometime midFebruary. And I spoke to Mike
Borcelli when I came up with all these dates. I did this in coordination with Mike knowing it's his schedule. Um, and I think we can address things like that parking area through that notice of intent process. I don't think it needs to be addressed here. I
think it's better addressed through the notice of intent process cuz then they can come back and propose an alternative solution. Maybe we'll see. But um so I would recommend the board vote the enforcement order that's
drafted. We said we would send you a draft prior just because of those outstanding um issues that weren't maybe fully explored during the hearing process because we just came to a
standill. So, um, I think requiring the notice by February 18th, we can work through some of those issues through the notice. >> And the quorum is just Courtney, Ron, Steve, and Dave. >> What's that? >> The quorum is Courtney, Ron, Steve, and Dave.
>> Okay. Um, so I need a motion. >> I I have a question. >> Yeah, go ahead. >> Uh, Jen, so there's a lot of innocentness enforcement order. >> Mhm. The presumption is this would drive the generation of the new notice int of
intent. We would we would hope that they would do everything in this address most everything in this enforcement in that >> correct. >> So so this this thing does say that back driveway what's it called the the reinforce driveway >> whatever that to be removed.
>> It says it says it has to go away. it it does say that um we we can't put in this enforcement order an alternative to that but like I said this will drive that notice of intent and when that notice of intent is submitted to the board
>> at that time >> if the applicant wants to present uh wants to keep it with mitigation wants to remove it and replace it with a different material >> okay >> we can discuss that at that time and you can make findings
in that order of conditions to address it. >> Yeah. So, so for instance, they might come and say, "We'd like to keep that that driveway back there, but we're going to we're going to suggest additional mitigation to compensate and then we could discuss it for for example." Correct. That could happen. Okay.
>> That could happen. >> I got you. Okay. >> But we need we need a motion that encompasses what was sent around, I believe, by email, the draft. So, I need a motion. Does that affect >> issued an enforcement order as sent to
uh the >> Oh, you on this, Ron? >> Am I on it? Yeah, Ron is on it. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Second. >> All right. We have a motion and a second um on to is it we're issuing an
enforcement order. Right. Right. Correct. Yeah. As just discussed. And the quorum is >> Courtney Ron Driscoll, Steve Patton, and David Kent. >> David Kent. How do you vote?
>> I vote I. >> Okay. Steve Patton. >> Patton I. >> And let's see who else. >> Driscoll. I. >> Driscoll. I. I. Other than me. Have I missed anybody? >> Nope. >> Okay. Bird eye. All right. We have
issued a an enforcement order and so we need one final motion at long last. >> Nope. You need you need two final you need you need a final motion but you need to pick a date since we close some hearings. We don't meet for a couple of weeks.
Therefore, we need to hold a special meeting to vote orders of conditions so I can get them written in the regulatory statutory time frame and issued. So, a couple of dates. >> So, I have to have these things out to
the door um by the 7th. >> I can have them drafted beforehand and just tweak what you vote. So, some of the dates available. Um I don't know if anybody feels like meeting
>> morning before I open our stockings. >> Yeah, Courtney. We got to get through this. We can do the 26th, which is the day after Christmas. Not sure what everybody's plans are. We could do the 29th, that Monday, the weekend after Christmas,
or we could do Tuesday the 23rd. I don't know what everybody's schedules say. >> I would opt for the 29th. That's kind of a >> Okay, >> that I mean that would be my suggestion. >> That'll work for me. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Um >> Okay.
>> In the morning, >> Steve. >> Bill. Is it build morning? >> Okay. What time in the morning, Bill? >> Um, I probably have to be out the door by 11. So, if we do like a normal like 10 o'clock in the morning type of thing,
I'm fine with that. >> Yeah. How about How about we do 9? Would that work for you, Steve? Ron Driscoll. >> What day of the week is this? >> Monday. Monday. Monday the 29th >> at 9 a.m. >> 9ine's a squeeze, but yeah, I have
something that goes 7:30 to 9, so I can do it. >> Okay, Courtney, one second. Steve, why is it a squeeze to you? Do you need 9:30 or 8:30? >> I have physical therapy at 7:30 to 9 on Mondays >> or 9:30. >> I got 9:30. >> Yep.
>> 9:30. >> 9:30, Steve. >> Okay, Ronnie, does that work for you? No, I have 9:30 appointment fing uh PT for my finger. >> I can do nine 10.
>> How about nine? >> I'll skip the bike. >> Okay, nine. >> Okay, Steve, >> you know how long are we? How many can How many do we have to vote? >> Hang on.
>> Uh we have to vote for uh >> four orders. Four orders. won't take long. >> Won't take 15 minutes the most. >> Let's do 9:00. >> That seems to work for the majority. And
um we'll be good. 9:00 we'll set a special meeting. Vote orders of conditions 9:00 a.m. Monday the 29th of December by Zoom. >> Oh, Zoom. >> Okay.
>> All right. Thank you. Motion to adjourn. >> You can come to the office. Ronnie Fi >> Merry Christmas. >> Merry Christmas. >> Merry Christmas.