Heat. Heat. [Music] [Music]
Good evening and welcome to the September 10th uh 2025 meeting of the Falma Conservation Commission. This meeting is being held virtually via the Zoom video conference and is also being broadcast um by FCTV on channel cable
channel 9. As this meeting is being recorded by Zoom and broadcast by FCTV, please be cognizant of what you say, how you say it, and what can be seen and heard in your background. >> Um we have a full complement of commissioners tonight. Thank you all for
your dedication. Um, I'd like to remind the commissioners that for commenting I will call on each of you in turn. So, please refrain from speaking um over each other. Also, all votes are done by roll call. So, when I
call your name, please state your name and your vote for the record, even if you made the uh made the motion or the second. To our public attendees, at any time during this meeting, you may enter any comment or questions via the chat
function. At the appropriate time, they will be read into the record. If an attendee, if as an attendee you'd like to participate in a particular hearing, let us know via the chat function. Then at the appropriate time,
you will be promoted into the hearing as a participant. When you are selected, you must uh have your video enabled, be succinct, respectful of others. Public comments will be limited to three minutes each. Regarding IDAS, under a
request for a determination of applicability, the applicant is asking the commission to determine if the provisions of the Massachusetts Wetland Protection Act and or the FM wetland bylaws apply to their proposed project. A negative determination
um is that the provisions of the act and or the bylaw do not apply. Therefore, the project may proceed as proposed. A positive determination means the provisions of the act and/or the bylaw do in fact apply and or may require some
conditions. Therefore, the project >> I do want to share with our viewers >> require a notice of intent application. So, as an applicant, you uh want to hear a negative determination. That's for an RDA.
All right. So, first up on the uh agenda this evening is vote minutes of August 27th, 2020. >> Mr. Chairman, I reviewed the minutes. I'd like to move approval of the minutes
of 9:27 8:27. >> Okay, we got a >> Steveard second and a second by Courtney. Thank you. Um, no other comments on the minutes. Okay,
hearing none, I'm going to call a roll. Courtney >> Bird I. >> Steve P. >> I roly I. >> Ronnie Bman I. David >> Kent >> I. >> Bill >> Duffy I
>> and Russ is an I. Unanimous. We accepted the minutes of August 27th, 2025. >> Request for a continuence under notice of intent in Janet Sun 188 C Pit Road with NAS for
permission to remove an unpermitted dock and to construct a landing with access stairs. Jen Yes, Mr. Chairman. The applicant is requesting a continuance until August 8th. >> No, >> wait a minute. When? >> Not August.
>> Oh, I'm sorry. October 8th. I'm sorry, guys. October 8th. >> I knew that. >> I'll second that with the right date. Driscoll >> Ron, you moved it, right?
>> And Ron, >> yes. Any other comments or questions? >> No. >> I'll call the roll. Courtney >> bird eye. >> Discali. >> Steve
>> I >> Ron's already voted. Ronnie >> I >> can't Ian move continue to October 8th. Uh, next up is Michael and Marne Farrell, 202
Edgewater Drive East, LLC, 202 Edgewater Drive East, Belmouth, Mass, uh, for permission to construct a dock. Jen, >> yes, Mr. Chairman, the applicant is requesting a continuence until uh, September 17th.
>> So move second. We have a motion and a second to uh continue to seven September 17th. Any other comments or questions? Uh hearing none. Call the roll. Courtney >> I. >> Eve
>> and I. >> Ronnie I >> K I. >> Bill >> Duffy I um Robins is an I. So, we continued until September 17th.
Uh, request for continuance under an enforcement order. Anthony Aveni Jr. and Elaine Aveni, 42 Squibnocket Drive, East of Mass. unpermitted reconstruction of the deck,
enlargement of the patio, installation of retaining features, and clearing within conservation jurisdiction. Jen, >> yes, Mr. Chairman, the applicant um I'm sorry, the property owner would like a continuence until September 24th.
>> So move. >> Let's go second. >> And we have a motion and a second to continue until uh September 24th by the owner. Um, any other comments or questions? Hearing none, I'll call the roll. Courtney >> I
>> Driscoll I >> I >> Duffy I >> Robins is an I unanimous continued until September 24th. Next up is Steve Augusta, 33 Oyster Shell Lane, Eastb of Mass. Unpermitted
removal of mitigation plantings and unpermitted installation of hardscape within conservation jurisdiction. Jen, >> yes, Mr. Chairman, the property owner would like a continuence until September 24th. >> We got a Steve, you moved it. Yes, sir.
>> Thank you. Cy second. That what I hear. >> How many continuences? >> Um, >> second. >> Or which one? This one. Oyster shell. >> Yeah, >> I don't know. Two or three. >> Not sure, >> Jen. Do you know that?
>> It's It's been quite a few, but um at this point, we do have a restoration expert retained. um they had some delays on their end, so we're just waiting on a plan. Um the intent though is to plant this fall.
>> Okay, >> good question. >> All right, so let me just go over that again. We have a motion by Steve and a second by Courtney to continue until September 24th. Is that correct? >> Correct. >> Okay. So, any other comments or
questions? Hearing none, I'll call a roll. Uh court >> uh bird eye. >> Steve >> P I >> Ron >> Escali >> Bman I >> David >> I >> Bill >> Duffy I
>> and Robins is an I unanimous continued until September 20th. Request for determination of applicability. Jason Sullivan, 420 Seco Shores Boulevard, found with Mass for
permission to reconstruct an existing deck. Um, Alyssa >> staff recommends a negative three under the state and a negative two under the bylaw. Resource area boundaries are not confirmed. >> Birds move >> second. >> Motion by Courtney and a second by Ron
Driscoll. Um, any other comments or questions? Hearing none, I'll call the role. Courtney >> Bird I >> Steve >> Ben I >> Ron >> Eisal I >> Dave >> Kent I
>> Bill >> Duffy I >> and Robins is an I unanimous um staff's recommendation um Gladstone Dolivera 70 Menard Road found with mass for
permission to remove and reconstruct a portion of an existing deck and conduct septic system repairs. Alyssa >> staff recommends a negative3 under the state and negative2 under the bylaw. Resource area boundaries are not confirmed. >> I'll move fiscal second.
>> Okay. Motion by Courtney and a second by Ron. Um staff's recommendation. I'll call the role. Courtney I >> be I >> Ron >> Eisali. Ronnie >> an I.
>> David >> I. >> Bill. >> Duffy. I >> Robins is an I. >> All right. Next up. Oh jeez. This is a long one here. I wonder who put this. >> Mr. Chairman. Um I need to recuse myself.
>> All right, Courtney. You're recused. Cipuetit Place Homeowners Association and residents care of Steve Wineig uh 0issitet road map/parcel
ID is 35-2-001-0000 43wiset road 42 loop road 43 loop road 50 loop road 54 loop road 58 loop road 60 loop road 64 loop road 68 loop road
72 loop road zero loop road map/ parcel ID is 35-02-004- 022 and 86 loop road found with mass for permission to um conduct follow-up invasive species management in
accordance with mass DP 25-3506 >> staff recommends a negative two under the state and a negative three under the bylaw research Adversary boundaries are not confirmed. >> Fiscal so moved. >> Thank you, Ron. How about Dave? You want to second that?
>> Yeah, I first second. Yes. >> Thank you. >> So, we have a motion in a second um to accept staff's recommendation. Um any other comments or questions? Hearing none, I'll call a roll. Steve
>> I. >> Ron. >> Mr. I. Ronnie >> home an I. >> Dave >> Kent I. >> Bill. >> Duffy I >> and Robins is an I. So we have uh six in favor and one abstension.
Any good court? You can come back. >> I'm here. We survived. >> All right. Thank you. Court. All right. Next up is Brian Chase 95 Shawwood Drive Felmouth Mass for permission to install native plantings. to replace imperous
surface with grass and for after the fact uh permission to refresh gravel dry gravel area and remove vegetation. Alyssa >> staff recommends a negative three under the state and a negative two under the bylaw. Resource area boundaries are not confirmed.
>> Birds move second. >> A motion by Courtney and a second by Ron. Um any other comments or questions? There are none. I'll call for the vote. Courtney Bird I >> Steve I >> Ron
>> I >> Ronnie >> Bman I >> Dave >> I >> Bill >> Duffy I >> and Robbins is an I unanimous. Next up is uh Gerard Steel 18 Main Entry
Road Falmouth Mass for permission to install a new Title 5 sewage disposal system. Remove an existing deck, construct an addition, rinse station, retaining wall, and an additional parking area. Uh, install a hardcape
patio and walkway. Alyssa >> staff recommends a negative two under the state and bylaw. Resource area boundaries are not confirmed and this project solely takes place in an AE flood zone. >> Birds move. >> Driscoll second. >> Okay, we have a motion by Courtney,
second by Ron. Um, any other comments or questions? >> Okay, hearing none, I'll call the role. Courtney >> Bird I. >> Steve >> and I. >> Ron, I >> Ronnie >> M. I >> Dave >> I.
>> Bill >> Duffy I >> and Robins is an I. It's uh unanimous. Accept staff's recommendation. All right. Next up is Curtis Watkins, 179 BBacres Road, Felmouth, Mass for
permission to construct a generator platform and install an elevator. Alissa >> staff recommends a negative three under the state and a negative two under the bylaw. Resource area boundaries are not confirmed. >> So move fiscal second.
>> Okay, we have a a motion and a second to accept staff's recommendation. Any other comments or questions? Hearing none, I'll call a roll. Courtney >> I. >> Steve >> an I. >> Ron >> I. >> Ronnie
>> Bman I. >> Dave >> Kent I. >> Bill >> Duffy I. >> And Robins is an I. Thank you. All right. Uh, next up is Alex M. and
Karen A. The Jarian 53 Cape Cod Road Felmouth with Mass for permission to install a swimming pool. Melissa >> staff recommends a negative two under the state and a negative three under the bylaw. Resource area boundaries are not confirmed.
>> So move second. >> Okay, we have a motion and a second. Any other comments or questions? Okay, I don't see any hearing none. I'm going to call for the I'll call the role. Courtney >> bird eye. >> Steve
>> I >> Ron >> Briscoll I >> Ronnie >> Bman I >> Dave >> H I >> Bill >> Duffy I >> and Robins is an I. So that's unanimous. Thank you
staff's recommendations. All right. Um Brandon next up is Brandon C. Nunan the 3rd 277 Shwood Drive Fouth Mass for permission to construct additions decks and a rinse station. Alissa >> staff recommends a negative two under
the state and bylaw. Resource area boundaries are not confirmed and this project solely takes place in an AE flood zone. >> So move second. >> We have a motion by uh Courtney and a second by Ron. Um any other comments or questions?
Okay, hearing none. I'm going to call the roll. Courtney I >> Steve >> and I. >> Ron >> Biscll I. >> Ronnie >> an I. >> Steve. >> I. >> Bill. >> Duffy. I >> and Robins is an I. So it's unanimous on
to accept staff's recommendations. Thank you very much. All right. All right. Uh, next up is um request for a hearing under notice of intent. All hearings of the Falmouth Conservation Commission are held simultaneously under the authorities of the Massachusetts
Wetland Protection Act and the Falmouth Wetlands bylaw. Although a single decision of the commission is issued, uh, it represents a separate decision under each authority. And first up tonight
we have uh Joan Goldberg, 208 Mil Road, Felmouth, Mass for after the fact permission to construct a dock with a kayak launch. Jen, >> yes, Mr. Chairman, I've promoted Chuck Rolando from Capen Islands Engineering
to present his project. Good evening, Chuck. We haven't seen you in a bit. >> Uh, good evening, Chuck Roland, Capen Islands Engineering. I am representing the Goldbergs at 208 Mil Road. Uh I'm going to share my screen if that's okay
with you. >> Let me know when that pops up. >> Um great. Um so we uh the project as proposed is to permit and maintain an existing unpermitted ramp, float, and kayak
launch. um and relocated two feet further out into uh Sitter's Pond at 208 uh Mil Road. Um the project requires a waiver from the uh Felmouth wetland wetland regs uh for the area of the
terminal L or T-shape in the um or fixed dock um for the float or combination thereof shall um the requirement is that it shall not exceed 100 ft. And if you add in the end float and the kayak rack,
um, we're at 101 square ft, so we're asking for a one square ft waiver. Um, additionally, uh, the existing floats and kayaks launch will be relocated 2 feet further out. Um, and a proposed 12T ramp with through flow decking will be
installed. A revision to the narrative is that the post will not be driven um as discussed in uh 3.3 construction methodology. It'll be uh hand work only. They'll be able to pick the posts up, shift
everything out 2 feet um and no excavator will be needed. Um and uh the proposed relocated um posts uh do not need a heavy equipment.
So we believe that there will be very little impact in this area as the proposed work is uh all handdone. Um the land underwater buddies uh is the
area under below the um seasonal watermark uh of Citers Pond. Um and then a couple other notes. Um, we believe that we meet all of the wetland regulations for the found wetland rigs.
Uh, 10.53E. Uh, so I can run through those real quick, but the dock is going to be less than 100 ft long. Uh, the terminal end is, um, has more than 3 ft of water at it. Uh, we are requesting the one square
foot waiver for the terminal end. Um, we will not be um interfering with recreational inner title or lateral access. Um, no boats shall leak oil. Uh,
we plan on using just kayaks. Um, uh, boats will not run in gear while tied up. Um, uh, we are asking that the boat stay in or the ramp, uh, sorry, the bloat stay in year round. Um, we had some staff
comments asking for a bubbler. The client has noted that the lake has not frozen over in over 20 years. Um, so if it's okay that we'll buy a bubbler and if it looks like the water is uh going to freeze over or if we have a cold snap, we can deploy a
bubbler fairly easily. Uh, but we're going to request that we not have a bubbler in at all times. Um, and just to go over the reason for the twoft um, pushing it further further 2 ft out
is so that way we will have um, a separation to the substrate on the floats. Um, right now it's really right up against the um the um, grade of the lake where if we shifted out the two feet we believe we'll have about half a
foot separation. These floats draw about less than 2 feet of water uh even with people walking on them. Um and so we believe that we meet the spirit of your regulations. Um if we do shift it out those um two
feet um staff did request uh float stops if you'd really like uh need feel that we need float stops. It's very difficult to put float stops on a design like this. Uh, so we would request that we put in um
like a a timber pad on the bottom here. So that way if when the lake drops uh it just rests on that one spot and it's only going to be at the end here as it drops off fairly quickly. And we don't believe that any other part along the float uh would touch the bottom. So that
would be more of like a a 2x4 or 2x6 sleeper. And we think that um having a sleeper of that size would dissipate any load that that float would create. So we don't think it would really cause that much of a disturbance to the bottom. So
with that, I'm happy to take any questions. >> All right. Thank you, Chuck. Um Jen, >> yeah, Chuck, uh can you explain that pad again for me? you want to put a just a plywood pad underneath the float.
>> So, what they could do is they could attach um not plywood, but like a 2x6 um piece of timber to the bottom of the float and then um so that way it would be more of a sleeper that it would if
the lake were to drop it would rest on that one piece of wood as opposed to uh the float. Um either that or we could shift it out further if the um commission would prefer that. But we would have to have a totally new pier
installed um as the this type of fe pier does not accommodate float stops. Okay. So just for the board uh this pier was put in without any permits. Um, so, um, now we're trying to retrofit
something that was installed without a permit to fit our rags. Um, my concern is just having that float resting on the water when the water level drops. Is there a way to maybe sleeve the posts or something and
stop them somehow doing it like that? because that's what I thought when uh what what you meant and that's not what you mean. You're just putting another piece of like post in and so when it drops it would rest.
>> Um we' actually like >> lay it on. >> Yeah. We'd actually attach it to the float so that way there's just a pad that rests on the bottom. Um what you said was interesting. the the the M I talked to the manufacturer this morning
and he he really didn't have a great solution. Um I'd be afraid that we would compromise the posts if we put that in and then um it would definitely get a little tricky with manufacturing parts that could kind of fit on this
type of float if we did that. Uh and did your with your >> but they could put in a new they could put in another dock and meet that. Correct. Yeah, I mean that would definitely Yes, that's always a possibility. >> Okay, my other thing is um we we don't
have waiverss, Chuck, but but that's okay. I mean, the board's allowed um these types of kayak launch docking systems in the past. So, I wouldn't I wouldn't worry about asking for a waiver. We just don't do that. It's not a provision under our regs. But um um
we're still kind of curious on the math where you got the 101 where I just got >> Oh, I've lost my little calculator. >> 162 or something like that. So, if you take the the if you take the the numbers
that you have on the plan for just the floats, I'm not even talking about the ramp, >> but if you take the kayak launch numbers you have on the plan and the two floats, if they're both 5 by 9 and a half, your numbers aren't working.
>> Sure. So, um I actually ran this through with Alyssa today. Um so, I'm happy to talk about it. >> Please. So for the terminal end, we're going to use um the second of the two floats as
opposed to all three floats. So be the 5 by 9 and 1/2 which is um >> 48 square ft. >> So yes, that's 48 square ft. And then the remainder of that to bring up to 101
is the kayak launch. And so I know it does say 4.8 8x4. Um, so that brings you to 67.2, but that does not account for the voids. So if you see my cursor right there, there's a
void on this side and then a void cut out. Yeah. >> Yeah. And so then if you would like, I can show you a quick photo uh to show those voids. Um, I don't know if it shows up on your
end, but do you see that? >> Yes. >> Yeah. So, that's that's where the math kind of comes from. So, >> so on this hold this picture, right? >> Yep. >> Go back to your go back to your 4x6.
Where would that be located? >> Right here. We We would fasten it underneath this part. Got it. Okay. All right. And >> it would actually be fastened to the bottom side of the float. So that way it was more of a spread load, spread
footing than um a point load on the corner of the float. >> Okay. >> Um >> Okay. I mean, again, this came in as unfortunately an unpermitted structure. Um, yeah,
>> if the board's comfortable with Chuck's >> thing about So, the whole point is this pawn fluctuates and this >> when we were there it was resting on the bottom. So, that's just what I kind of want to avoid. It's a very small structure. Again, they have the board
has allowed these types of kayak launch systems in the past even though they technically exceed that terminal float thing. And that's something we can work on in in the regs going forward. Um, but as long as this
thing does not rest, the entire structure does not rest on the bottom of the pond, that's that would be the goal. Um, >> and we're amendable to the condition along those >> Yeah. to permitting this. Um, and Chuck, only the one thing you said there is no
BVW even though it's written all over the application. >> Uh, sorry, I kind of looked real quick for it. What did we list it as a resource? >> Alyssa. >> Yeah, it's written in the narrative and
it's also on the plan um to some of the notes to the right there. >> All right. Well, we looked at it again today. We don't feel it's a BVW. Um and I'm happy to submit a revised plan uh
showing the uh buffers like we talked about today. >> Okay. Thank you. That's all I have. Mr. Chairman, >> great. Thank you, Chuck. Can you stop sharing? >> Sure. Um,
I'm not super savvy, so I feel like I'm missing something here. >> Uhhuh. >> If you >> There you go. >> Thank you. All right. So, commissioner question. >> Alyssa, do you have any I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman. Alyssa, did you want to have
anything? Uh just one final staff comment. The buffer is being cut, Chuck, and there aren't any permits for that. So just for the cutting to stop. Thank you. >> Y >> No, that's Thank you, Jen, for reminding me. Um
Courtney questions. Um, yeah, I'm uh I hate to be a stickler on this, but I even though one foot is dimminimous, I I worry about setting precedents and opening doors and uh
things coming back to uh give us a heart fabulator later on. Um could that deck be shortened by a foot? You don't you it's not going to affect your kayak launch. Yeah, you have to reset your your piles, but you could move the
shrink the deck by a foot, you know, overall length and actually then you'd be under wonders, which would be wonderful. >> Um, so these are modular. Um, it's a modular type system, so we can't
really, >> it's not like a timber pier where you can just cut a foot off. So, how can we get this under so we don't have to grant waiverss and open doors for precedents and things?
I mean, you guys did put this thing in on your own without a permit. So, why should I make it easy on you? Just here representing my client as best I can. Um I one thing we could do is we
could remove um I you know I I don't I >> what what's that deck made out of that it's modular that can't be modified? >> Plastic. >> Yeah. >> Sturdy durable plastic. >> Yeah.
>> Last I knew you could cut sturdy durable plastic. >> Anyway, that's my my take on it. Maybe I'm being overly grumpy, but then again, I guess I have a right to be. Um, you know, you guys put this in on your own
and we wanted to comply and you're asking us to grant a waiver even though it's one foot. Um, that gives me a heart throb because then that later on gives Jen and Alyssa and staff a heart throb when the next guy comes along and wants
a waiver. So, you know, I I'm I you know, it's called pentance, >> right? Get your point. >> You know, so you got to figure it out how to make it comply and not ask us to stretch it even more when you didn't do
it right the first time and get it permitted. Probably if you'd gotten it permitted, then you wouldn't have had a problem with the one one foot over. I'm sorry to be a pain about this, but I'm looking at my other commissioners all rolling their eyes and so forth.
[Music] >> All right. You all set, Court? >> I'm all set. >> Thank you. Uh Steve, >> uh no, my concern was more that this seems to be a case of uh asking for
forgiveness instead of permission. >> Yes, it is. And um it's unusual for staff to be supportive of uh this. So I am at the moment still of the position
that would we have allowed this doc if it had come in under the permit. I don't know if you want to answer that now, but that's the question I have in my head. Thank you. >> Thank you, Steve. Uh, Ron. >> Yeah. Uh, I don't have a problem with
101 feet, but what my question is, um, I mean, we're worried about the the pond depth going up and down. Right now, we're in a series two or article two, whatever. Level two drought. >> Level two. >> Nowhere near the Nowhere near the pond bottom now, is it?
>> No. >> No. >> It's just not a big concern of mine. If they if they've come up with a little piece of wood or something to save it on a extreme drought, then uh I'm okay. That's all. Thank you. >> There you go, Ron. Ronnie,
>> uh Chuck, I think that's a good solution. Putting the sleeper underneath whether it be a 4x4 and I'm okay with the the 101 myself. >> I'm okay with the 101. I I have one question for Jen. Uh Jen, that sleeper
that also pushes down on the shore with the bottom. So why does it solve? >> Why is it what, Dave? >> What does it solve? Why is it better than the pier pushing down? >> It's only four It's only 4 in, not the whole bottom of the float. I think
>> the whole bottom of the float is pushing on there. Okay. So So it's it's going to reduce the uh it's a square footage or or whatever. It's gonna reduce the footprint of if it does if it does push down. Is that is that what it's doing? >> I think that's the idea, Dave, is it would it reduce the footprint of the
disturbance by at least that it would just be that one >> Yeah. >> that >> 6x4. >> Yeah. >> Instead of the whole thing resting on the bottom. >> Ronnie, does that make sense? You're experienced. >> Yes.
>> Okay. All right. Um, quick one for Chuck. Chuck, how old is this? How long has this uh doc been there? Been there? >> Um COVID 2019 2020. >> All right. So, fairly recent. Okay. Uh
last question. Uh is it is it appropriate to ask to to discuss Steve's question? Steve asked if we would have permitted this the way it was presented here. Is that an okay question to ask in this forum or not? >> I'm happy. >> Absolutely. >> Yeah, >> it it is. You have
>> I'm thinking of a particular one. And I just tried to bring it up and I apologize. Next time I will have the VPN running. If I try to jump on the VPN to bring up the plans, you guys all just froze. So I had to jump out of it. Um
there was one, correct me if I'm wrong, Alyssa on Adam 95. I was getting there Chakuna Messa pond where there was a structure with linear floats
like that and next to it was a kayak launching type float structure attached to it. So this wouldn't be breaking with it. Not that it wouldn't break precedent, but you
have allowed a kayak launch system similar to this in the past. I don't know the exact square footage of the last one, but I do think and I do believe, correct me if I'm wrong,
Alyssa, it exceeded that 100 square foot terminal float provision that you have. >> It did. And it was also in a pond environment. >> Correct. >> So, this one that you're referencing is
144 square ft. Now, but Chuck, did that include both floats where you're just including one float? Because if we included both your floats, we came out to about 162. >> It was a different structure. It was wider. >> Different shape.
>> Yeah. At the terminal end, it was it was slightly different. >> It It was the same concept. It was the same idea having the float being able to walk out and then get into the kayak and launch the kayak. So it's not to me like we can't be certain that had this come
in we' asked for permission we would have said yes it's not out of keeping with things we've done in the past. So >> you've done one similar one possibly two that I know of and that's that's it and that's recently.
>> That's good enough. Thank you. >> All right. I'm done. Yeah. Um, as long as uh you can rectify the the boat uh the dock not touching the ground, if you can appease the the
staff, then I have no issue with this at all. I don't mind the one extra foot. But as long as you can, you know, appease, you know, Jen and Alyssa with that. Otherwise, um, like like she said, you can always build a new dock.
Well, if if this had come in as an um as a notice to do it, I mean, we wouldn't even be talking about the 100 foot. Um we'd be, you know, we'd have probably specified that there had to be stops on that first section so that it couldn't
you wouldn't have to worry about putting a a sleeper underneath there. Um probably could have got it a little bit longer at that end. Um but anyway, um as far as I'm concerned, I think if
if it did come in as a notice, yes, there would have been a few changes. Um but it probably would have gone by in in my opinion, but just my opinion. Uh
anything else um from the commission? Yeah, I I think we didn't touch on the uh compressor for the water. I >> b yeah putting the compressor in. And so I think that's something we need to look at. I know it probably hasn't frozen
over since it's pawn in quite some time, but >> Well, depending on this goes, that would be probably in the orders of conditions, you know. >> Yeah. I mean, when I started out, we used axes and cohog rigs to pull an Aquista, but um I think that's going to have to be a condition.
>> Um I was hoping for a, you know, a happy medium where we had the equipment and we could deploy the equipment, but just maybe not leave it running all winter. Um or maybe if we put it in there and then just run an extension cord if it looks like it is going to freeze. Um but
I'm happy to go with whatever you guys suggest. All right, Jen, did you have something else? And then we're going to go um >> just one one quick thing. Um Chuck, we can we can discuss that in deliberations. I mean, the purpose of having a bubbler is more so so um when
we're looking at more of a a solid saltwater pure structure, I mean, those things can can um experience some severe ice lift. Um, and when they're attached to salt marshes and everything, they can cause quite a bit of damage. Um, in this
case, we check, you're right, there is no BVW. We're only dealing with an inland bank. The only damage that's going to occur is to Miss Goldberg's actual plastic dock structure. I mean, it'll it'll just get
>> crushed. Um, that said, going back to the one on Anamancet, I do believe, correct me if I'm wrong, Alyssa, that that was also a module module type structure. It wasn't something that was
constructed. It was it was already kind of built and and placed there. Correct. Yeah. Um, so even though the dimensions aren't exactly the same as the uh kunamas pawn thing, again, it's the same concept
and we can always um talk with the board in the future when we're looking at changing the regs and and look at these types of structures to allow in certain pawns that don't have
or have a restricted horsepower um what am I what's the word I'm looking for? Restricted horsepower provision or or rule on them from the town. We can always look at and allowing these types of structures for ease to get into a kayak.
That's >> I think in ponds we also see significantly smaller docks. >> Correct. >> So this added square footage might be larger in the terminal end but not as big as we see coastal docks. >> Correct. >> All right. Uh, Jen, anything in the
chat? >> Nothing in the public chat. Mr. Chairman, >> what's your pleasure? Are we would we need anything else? J, >> I don't believe so. I think the outstanding questions are like is the
board one going to accept that sleeper? You can discuss that in deliberations. Two, the bubbler. And three, just the the the the size. Okay. Um, anything else from the commission? All
right. What's your pleasure? >> Make a motion to close the hearing and take it under adisement. Driscoll. >> Second. >> So, we have a motion by uh Ron Driscoll to close the hearing and take it under advisement. A second by Courtney. Any other comments or questions? Okay. There
are none. I'm going to call the role to close the hearing. Uh, Courtney. Bird. I >> Patton I >> Ron >> I >> Bman I >> Dave >> I >> Bill
>> Duffy I >> and Robins is an I. So we're unanimous on closing the hearing. >> Thank you. >> Thank you Chuck. >> Good night Chuck. >> All right. Uh next up is um 188 C pit
road which has been continued until October 8th. All right. And then 202 Edgewater Drive East, that's also been continued to September 17th. Uh, continue request for a hearing under notice of intent.
Susan Garland, 42 Chase Road, Falmouth, Mass for permission to remove approximately 7100 square feet of Common Reed, uh, Fragmitees, Australius. >> Chairman, I need to recuse myself.
Thank you. >> Mr. Chairman, I have promoted Tyler Jendro of Environmental Landscaping Solutions up to present his project. Kylie, you got me. I was about to click on you and then you raised your hand. You jumped to the top. So, I almost
promoted the guy from FCTV up. All right. Evening, Tyler. The floor is yours. Oops. >> Uh just loops. Oh no. There we go. >> We can't hear you, Tyler.
>> Sorry. Can you hear me now? >> Yes, we can. >> Okay. Uh good evening, commissioners. For the record, my name is Tyler Gdro, environmental landscape solutions representing the applicant Susan Garland for the proposed removal of invasive fragmitees and mitigation following
unpermitted hardscape at 42 Chase Road. Uh this project was initially brought before you um in March and we were just proposing this 78 or 7,900 square ft of fragmitees. Uh in a previous
application, there was an unsuccessful organic treatment that was proposed. Uh we're proposing a cut and stem injection with a wetland approved herbicide. Um we have details in the narrative, but uh we've had great success with this kind
of um project. We have a couple years where we come in, we use a trackin, trackout method to try to limit as much disturbance to the salt marsh. Uh while we were submitting that application, there were a number of uh minor uh infractions that were found on the site.
So we started working with staff getting a revised site plan and uh calculated uh for a fire pit extension of a patio, a front walkway, retaining wall, stone driveway, and two sheds. Uh when we did our calculations, we calculated about
3,871 ft of mitigation would be required. Um, we worked with staff. We originally had a meadow proposed in here and we uh changed to uh all woodland species uh planted four feet on center to meet all
mitigation requirements. Um, during our the final staff report, there was a small area where there were some uh lower laying trees uh that we'd be happy to accommodate and and replace. Um, and there was just some discussion about some of the plantings that we proposed
under these cedars. Um, we do a lot of mitigation and and all of these plants that we have proposed under here do do well under shady conditions and uh we really feel that this area of mitigation is is appropriate. We don't uh we
actually calculated around the tree trunks to ensure we weren't planting too close to the trees, but we'd be happy to sort of discuss this and and how best to uh proceed. Thanks. >> Okay, Tyler. You can stop sharing now.
>> Great, >> Jen. >> Yes, Mr. Chairman. Um, thank you. Tyler has addressed most of most of the staff's concerns except for that area that he just mentioned under some existing cedars. There were two areas of
proposed mitigation planting. One under an area which he has removed and cited elsewhere on the property. Thank you, Tyler. Um, and then this area right now, this area is very shaded. It consists, I
believe, of mulch right now. Um, it doesn't even believe that grass is growing under there. And we do have serious concerns about mitigation plantings being placed in this area. Um again, most of these the the reason for
the like large amount of mitigation is a lot of um or all of the elements that the mitigation is addressing were unpermitted activities that are being permitted after the fact. So staff feels
very strongly that they can either one move that required mitigation which we do not believe will s thrive in that area. It it may survive but it's not going to thrive in that area or they the
applicant can um remove some of the unpermitted features to reduce that mitigation requirement. That's all I have for right now. Mr. Chairman, >> thank you. John and Alyssa. >> Um Tyler, just our second comment. It was something I noticed when I went back
and looked at the staking. Um I put a little clipped image in the staff report and highlighted in blue. It's going around those first cedar trees. Um just when I saw the staking, it looked like the outline of the cedar trees was kind of um over where some of the plants
would grow. It just didn't look like you could actually fit single plants in there um like a single row. So, I was just recommending that that area get relocated. >> Yeah, I took a look at some of the the site photos that I had. I I think that's I think you're correct. Um, and we're
happy to change that. >> Um, I I have some photos if the commission would like to see and I can just kind of explain some of the areas. Maybe the entire area can't be planted or or they feel that. Um, again, we we do a lot of mitigation. Uh, standard uh
three-year maintenance and monitoring contracts. uh make sure that we ensure that these plants are successful. And again, a lot of these are in thick, heavily wooded areas of the Cape. Um but if I may just share my screen one more time and show just the area that we have
in question. So if if you were looking at the plan, it's the the lower portion. So this is the portion of the driveway that's proposed to be removed. Most of it being in the 50oot buffer zone. Tyler, we're not seeing anything. Sorry. >> Sorry.
>> It's okay. >> How is that? >> Yep, we see that. >> Sure. Yeah. So, this red kind of shows the area where we're uh some of the driveways to remain. So, we talked about some of this area here, but there's some portions uh obviously all the areas
aren't the same. Uh I think we had talked about some of this area being a little bit lower and understand that. Uh but this I mean underneath these cedars this is very this is about 7:30 in the morning. If you gave it another hour this is going to have significant sunlight in there. Uh and then heavily
shaded in the afternoon. But again certain species like plethora um and huckleberry all of these do do really well under those conditions. It's it was mulched over the years. I I told the applicant if you could forego the
mulching this year because we're planning to do the mitigation. And so that's the reason why there isn't any plants in here except for this one uh rose of Sharon that we'd honestly like to get rid of, but um understand that we would leave it and plant around it. But
um again, and here's another picture just the the branches I measured about 7 to 8 ft up here. None of the none of our plants really get much taller than that, so they'd have plenty of space to get through. There's a little bit of shade around this portion, which is uh to the
west of the mitigation. So maybe we can work with the commission or staff to maybe just edit some of those areas. But I I I think that it's a it's devoid of vegetation. It would be really good. It's it's in the buffer zone. So I think beefing that up and then also just being uh continuous with the mitigation that's
also in proposed in this lawn area uh would look really nice and and really fill in that area. Well >> Tyler, if you could bring your plan back up for a second if you don't mind. So the point of mitigation is to create a buffer and the regulations clearly state
that the mitigation plantings need to be as close as the resource area as possible. Could you blow that up for a second for me please Tyler? >> Yes. >> If you take a look and I know Tyler you you're working you know on behalf of your client doing a great job representing them. But if you look at
the the way the mitigation is is um placed on the property we have all these little paths through there. they seem that you're not forming a nice thick buffer which that's what mitigation is for and I stress to the board that this
is because the elements that this mitigation is um addressing or unpermitted activities on the property. Um we have we're bicting the mitigation for this patio and fire pit area, the
garden area where you were just showing. we have another open area or mitigation. I don't know what that area is. Um it just seems that there are different clumpings and groupings of these mitigation areas. And again, the area
where the cedars are are very low growing. There could be more trees out there that I'm unaware of. But again, these these it's not being placed closest to the resource area. It's not providing a continuous buffer. And again, if the applicant or the
property owner applicant is not satisfied with the amount of mitigation that is required for the unpermitted um structures, hardcape, uh driveway area, then those those elements on the property can be removed.
>> That's all, Mr. Chairman. >> Thanks, Jim. >> Not a problem. You want to stop sharing, Tyler? >> Oh, you can stop. >> Oh, yeah. Sorry about that. >> All right, Alyssa, did you have anything else?
>> Not at this time. Thank you. >> Commissioner questions. Um, Steve, we'll start with you. >> Thank you. But I don't have any questions. Thank you. >> No, I'm all set. Thank I have no questions. Good luck. Get good luck getting rid of those u the
weeds. >> Ronnie. Oh, Ronnie's >> favorite. >> Yep. Dave, >> whatever those are. >> No questions. >> Nope. >> Yeah, I was actually going to bring up
the the same thing Jen brought up when I looked at the plans and saw it. Um, I would recommend that uh that the the applicant actually form a continuous buffer and not plant around their their
objects. Um, and if they can do that with um the blessing and work with conservation staff, then I'd be good with it. But that was going to be my point that I brought up anyways. And Jen articulated much better than me. So, thank you very much.
>> All right. bill. Okay. Um, anything in the uh chat? Uh, Jen, >> nothing in the public chat, Mr. Chairman. >> Okay. So, we're clear. Um, what's your pleasure, guys? We want to do we if you if if they did sit down with you, Jen,
and you kind of made it more contiguous, we need another plan. They have to draw another plan. That correct? >> Correct. So, um, is this something we could close and do that way or would you prefer that we um Oh, Courtney, I'm sorry. I did I miss >> No, no, that's all right. I was first of
all going to agree with uh Bill's um suggestion and basically with staff if they can come up with a continuous buffer, I'm happy. Um yeah that I mean that's
>> so it can can that be conditioned or do we um you know continue it so that we get something definitive that we can all hang our heads >> how uh receptive is your client going to
be to that concept? Yes. So, I think the the driveway uh may we may like you mentioned, we may be able to take some of the driveway um and and remove some of that and kind of work I I think she understands or the the client
understands, hey, we got to we got to get this done. Um and it's actually was was pretty receptive. I don't know if anybody saw the lawn out there, but it's just totally dead. Um, so there were some areas that we could definitely try
to prioritize that 50-ft buffer zone. I think that we could meet it with a reduction a little bit more in the driveway if the commission is amendable to that. Uh, and the combination of just the removal of that that one uh, planting area that we discussed and
moving it closer to the resource area. >> So that so we needed a continuence for that. That's going to be up to the board. >> I I would recommend a continuence board. I want to >> I mean, we could work with Tyler or the
board if you wanted to have the continuence. That's fine, too. Doesn't matter to us. >> You wouldn't be have to have the continuence. It would be October 8th. >> The only thing that would concern me, Jen, is if he came to lockerheads and couldn't, you know what I mean? And we
go ahead and close the hearing and the staff. >> How about Tyler? we just continue it. Well, I know it's been continued out a bunch. I know we're right against that planting thing for you, but if we get got it to the ETH, we could work with you next week, get a plan together, get
it before the board. Um, actually, hang on. Wait, hold on. We might be able to get to Hang on. There we go. >> Alyssa, could we do it on the 24th? Do
you think >> it would be very quick? >> Tyler, would that work? If we could work with you at the towards the end of this week, early next week, you get us a plan. We could get you if you could get it to us, you know, by Wednesday,
Thursday next week. We'll give you an extra day. You could get it on the 24th. That way we could get you in order and then you could get I know you want to get started on that Fragmitees. This this Yeah, this was the only thing. >> Yeah, I just let the let the commission
know that the the Fragmitees window is is closing like a midocctober is probably the latest. Um >> we could work with you to allow you to start that work early, Tyler. >> Yeah. >> I mean that's we know that's the main um
goal of the project. You kind of got caught in all of this. Yeah, >> we could absolutely work, Mr. Chairman, with your blessing with Tyler to start that fragmite work prior to having an official order issued and recorded and
you know uh appeal dates held and all of that to to get this fragmitees going. >> Um before I move on here, Dave, you got your hand up? I see a good >> Yeah, Tyler, what why is there a window with fragmitees? Why is there an end date?
>> Yes. So what with Fragmite's uh removal they have a seed pod and what happens with the seed pod is that right now it's in its boot stage. So it's in its reproduct reproductive stage. When we use this wetland approved herbicide when it's in its reproductive stage it's more
uh much more likely to uptake than if it's past its reproductive stage. So we we would definitely if we were beyond it, we wouldn't recommend anything beyond say mid-occtober because then we would be using a a wetland approved herbicide that doesn't affect the
aquatic species but nonetheless wouldn't be as it effective. So then we would have another year um of of work that would be required. Whereas if we can work with you there there's uh really no negative effect to it other than we're going to be have a uh at least a 50 to
60% success rate year one. then go back and and get this under under control because I don't know if anybody's been out to the site, but it's really really dense and it's a going to be a really timeconsuming project, but we really want to make sure that marsh is uh is healthy. And then one of our ongoing
conditions that we have is if there's any um degradation after the fact, we would we would plant and work with staff on that as well. >> And last thing I say, just make sure I'm clear what we're doing here. We would expect that the next time this comes in front of us, we'll see a new plan and
that plan hopefully will have we have a more continuous buff continuous buffer. Right. That's what we're hoping for. >> Correct. >> Correct. >> Yes. To be clear. Thanks. >> I'm done. >> Did you have something? >> Yeah. Just a question. What's the uh what's the active ingredient in in the
herbicide you use? >> Yeah. So, we typic Yeah. So, we typically use a combination of two different. We typically start with a glyphosate based wetland approved herbicide. Oftent time we can use another product. It's called immazipir.
It's a it's a similar it's a it's a it's just that it is an herbicide. So again it doesn't affect aquatic species like muscles, clams, fish. It it it really is it's dependent on the vegetation and rather than a folure spray, we're doing
injections to the stems only. Um and it and it there is there's been multiple tests that it just if you do just enough it doesn't affect the marsh. Um in some instances we're walking in and out so there's some damage there and then we replace the uh the cord grass.
>> Okay. >> All right. Um what's your pleasure guys? Um >> one second. Mr. Chairman Bill you had your hand up. Are you all set? >> Yeah. My uh my questions were answered during this previous discussion. >> Okay.
Okay. So, what would you like to do? Continue it or do you want to close it? >> No, I think we should continue it, Mr. Chairman, till the 24th. We'll work with Tyler to get a plan to the board next week and then uh again, uh with your blessing, we can work with Tyler on the
fragmiteies part of it to get him started before that window closes. I do understand what you're talking about, Tyler. >> I appreciate it. Not. >> Anyone have a problem with that, Jen? Working with them to get started with the fragmiteies? Anyone have >> No, not at all. I'd be happy to do that.
>> I got the commissioners. >> So, at the request of the applicant, I'll move to continue this hearing until September 27th. Is it >> 24? I'm sorry. >> Fiscal second. >> We have a motion in a second to continue
to September 24th. Um, any other comments or questions? Hearing none. And Jen, there was and nothing in the chat, correct? >> Nothing in the public chat. Mr. Chairman, >> thank you. Um, I'll call a rule. Courtney Bird.
>> Steve I. >> Ron. I >> Ronnie. >> Ronnie, we're >> Oh, Ronnie's recus. Sorry. Uh, Dave >> K. I >> Duffy I. >> And Robins is an I. So, we're continuous
to the 24th. Thank you. >> Thank you, Tyler. or we'll work with you, Tyler. >> Awesome. Thank you all very much. >> Not a problem. >> All right. Bye-bye. >> Next up, uh continued requests to amend an existing order of conditions.
Karen Alcott uh trustee small cottage nominee realy trust 141 fair road found mass uh requests to amend order of conditions for mass DP25-4746 to permit 85 square feet of gravel in
zone A with mitigation and a per and to permit gravel in zone B without mitigation. Yes, Mr. Chairman. Miss Alcott is here to present her continued project. Miss Alcott, do you have a plan that you can
share with us? >> Okay, you're muted right now, Miss Alcott. >> Just a second. I'll share it. Okay. Um, can everyone see the plan? >> No. >> Nope. >> Not yet. >> There you go. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Great.
>> Now as yet. >> Yes. Hi everyone. I'm Karen Ol. I'm the owner of 141 Fay Road. Um, I know we've met many times. Um, and I appreciate the diligence on both sides to try to get through this. When I first came with filings and hearings, I really thought I
was doing a um a certificate of compliance against the permit. Um we then ran into issues that I did not expect concerning the utility corridor and this pearl that was down here, part
of it in zone A, part of it in zone B. So for now months, we've been sort of working to see how could I um what kind of solutions could we come up with? I did work with staff many times, had powerpoints, had meetings, and I tried
to, you know, thread the needle of protecting windows that are right here that go down to the ground. Um, I removed the pearl right here, and um, so I I keep trying to figure out what is good enough. And when I, you know, we
had a couple tough hearings and I took your criticism to heart and was very, very upset. Um, and I I tried to, you know, I worked with Tom the surveyor, tried to find solutions. Um, and it this whole thing about this prabble, which
was the only thing under contention at that time, um, it and the amount of mitigation that I would have to do to kind of make this work so I could protect this window, I could line it up with the house a certain amount. Um, I I
thought that I had the okay to do some plantings. You told me that I didn't. So, I apologize. Last hearing, I think we've all been through this. It's been pretty torturous. So, this caused me to sort of step back and say, for the amount of mitigation that it's going to cause cost me to put this, is there a
better way that I could do it? And one of the things that I'm asking for is that I want to build a deck here because this is currently lawn. It's adjacent to the house. it would um and it's very unstable to have people on on shares.
So, in order to do that, I um did a couple I I think it's a smart thing for the property. A couple things that I did to do that working with Tom is we reduced some of this area. So, we just missed the window, but it doesn't have
as much um tax on the mitigation. I removed some granite steps that are over here. We knitted in this continuous sort of location for mitigation to come up with the right footage for mitigation to
allow this deck and there's one step here there's just one step those two elements reduce that take those granite steps away take all those stepping stones that I had talked about remove them and just try to lace in mitigation
as appropriate as I could um so we extended an existing spot over here. We added some that are goes down to the um the dune area down here. Um you know, tried to knit in appropriately. I had
asked in my narrative I might have to move these steps. I'm trying not to if I can, but I'm trying to lace this all in so all of this mitigation just basically runs out to where the steps are. Um and then I did uh you know put some
mitigation in these garden areas. Um and and so and and then there there you know there are a couple things that came up in the report that I saw last night is this area right here. There are four plants here. It's 14 ft from the house.
The hedge belongs to the neighbors and it's um on their property. the um there's not that much of an overhang. And so I have four plants there that I had planted before. So I I think that's I just tried to put this on a plan so
you guys could all see it. I've got about 35 stakes in my yard um with pink stickers all over the place and it it's I'm hoping that I've done the job that you would appreciate which is being
contiguous to the existing mitigation. Um trying to lace it in so it looks appropriate and reducing, you know, just basically trying to use the mitigation for more important things like a deck and so that people don't topple over. um
and and this issue of this pearavevel. So, um you know, again, that that's kind of I think what I have right now. I do have some photos if you want to see photos of this area, but I'll just pause right there um because I'm sure there's um questions or comments that I'd love
to answer. >> Thank you, Miss Al. Um Jen, did you have anything? >> Yes, Mr. Chairman. Um, Miss Al, I understand you're trying to lace and thread the mitigation, but as I stated at the last hearing, there's
supposed to be a buffer. Um, we don't particularly uh love or think the plants under that hedge are going to do well on that southern area where it's running up along the property line. So, we do want to remove
>> these four plants, Jen. >> Yes. Okay. >> Um I remove 40 square ft of of what? Nothing's there, Miss Alcott. It's nothing's there. >> Well, in the previous I'm sorry,
>> you had proposed in the previous proposed. That is correct. >> Yeah, it's proposed. It wasn't approved. Okay. Therefore, it can't be removed. >> Yeah. I was I was concerned about your comment that said I was misleading. I this was the move of the 40 was from the
previous proposed. You are correct on that. >> We never approved it. It never was installed. It never was mitigated for. >> No, I touched nothing as you asked me. I have touched nothing. The stakes are there. You can see it very clearly. >> Yep. That's fine.
>> Um and then the planting areas, there's still ornamentals in there. So if the board were to allow mitigation in those planting areas, the ornamentals should be removed. >> That's mostly on this side where there's
some liies. And so I sure I can I can do that if that's what you require. When I did the mitigation up here, I did not scorch the land. I left what was ever there and we planted in there. I had the same approach here. But if you need me to take out plants that have been there
for 20 years, I can remove those plants. Um, I I was planning to plant around them, but you guys can tell me if you'd rather have me remove old plants. Um, that's if if that's troublesome to you,
um, I can do that, but I just wanted to, you know, when we did this, we left whatever was there and planted around it. So, it's Mr. chairman. Um, and I'm I'm done. >> Okay,
>> I'll let Alyssa. Alyssa, can you jump in here for me, please, if you don't mind, Mr. Chairman? >> Not at all. Go ahead, Alyssa. >> I um Yeah, just to touch on a couple additional things. Malcott is requesting that should the board permit the deck um
that the mitigation associated with it be installed at 4 feet on center um per our new special condition about that. Um I did explain to Miss Alone on site that the coastal A zone is not the zone A. So we're all good there. >> Yeah.
Um, and again, it's up to the board whether they want to discuss it now or in deliberation should they close this hearing if the mitigation areas are appropriate and if the gravel can remain as is. Thank you.
>> Okay. Um, could you um stop sharing um Miss Alan? Thank you. >> Yes. Yes. >> All right. So, questions from the commissioners. We'll start with Ron this time. >> I have no questions or comments at this
time, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. >> Thank you, Ron. Uh Ronnie, >> this is all cott. Is there anything else you plan on doing in the future here so we can kind of get this >> I I >> have tried to crisscross this as much as I can. The deck when I when I looked at
the mitigation, I just wanted to make sure I was using the right things. And so I do not expect any other changes when it comes to planting and things surviving. I I can't control that. Um there is one area down by the dune that
I asked Alyssa when she came to visit, would it be possible to um stack the stones that are there um to take up less room and put, you know, have the existing dune just build out? Would that be acceptable? and and she's and I think
what we said Elsa correct me if you're wrong is to we would discuss that when we get to that mitigation. One of the concerns is my neighbors also have an open permit and it's it's unknown what they're planting. Um so
Mr. Bowman to to your point I've put down everything that I would like to do. I I would have a little pause whether it will succeed um some of the some of the mitigation areas particularly down by the dune and if there's a better way to do that so that the dune just extends
but I tighten up those rocks if that makes sense. I don't know if you're following that but >> no I just think that we'll take staff's recommendation and on the mitigation and try to get this to bed is what I think we're trying to do. >> Okay. Thank Well, I'd be happy to work
with Alyssa and Jen when it comes that that corner of the mitigation and if there's a better way to do it by tightening up the rocks or not. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thanks, Ronnie. Um Dave, >> um
a question on the pra I had to go back to Pra. It says remove 40 square feet. Was it actually put in and then removed or is it changing the plan? We're changing that. We're making a change in the plan. I'm sorry that's confusing. I had removed the pegravel. I thought we were
doing the right thing and then this issue about the window that there's there's no pearl in that area right now. >> Yeah, >> essentially the the gravel that she was previously proposing the square footage has been reduced. However, it was
mitigated for so that removal of 40 square ft in the zone A at three times the rate is being used as credit for what's currently being proposed. >> The other thing I'm as far as a new mitigation compared to the new deck and
you're talking about leasing, it's all fairly confusing to me. I I'm not sure is it is it easy to explain again fairly quickly what new mitigation is going into to mitigate for the deck? Yes. Would you >> try again? Make because I it kind of I missed.
>> You can share the screen again. >> Why don't I share the screen again >> again? Try to show me show us again where that new mitigation is and are there numbers on here that show >> there are there are >> So, Mr. Ken, it's the area right here.
Um, hold on a second. >> Green. The green right here was the original mitigation done, you know, that I thought was everything was fine. Okay. >> The extra mitigation for the deck is this red crosshatch
>> which goes from the line of where the previously planted in up to where the stone wall is. It's right now it's a grassy area. It's got some mulch. And the idea is to just pull the mitigation in concert with what's already been planted out here and make some sort of
curve um and tie these together so that it's basically a fatter native plant sort of look >> and that that mitigation the math works. That's enough. >> So the 285 is here. There's 100 over here.
Where's your cursor now? Where's >> there? 285 over here. Uhhuh. >> 40 over here. This little triangle. Okay. >> 100 over here. >> Down there. Okay. >> And then 50 over here. >> Where's the last one? Uh >> down on the part. >> Okay. Now Now I'm following your cursor
this time. Okay. >> Yeah. Sorry. >> And so uh Alyssa, all that all that math works out, right? >> Yes. Yep. There's actually a fifth section that's all cut by um one of those ornamentals. Uh the southern >> Excuse me. Right there. I'm Susie. You're right. You're right. I forgot
that 15 here. >> This time I could follow your cursor. Thank you very much. >> Sorry for the confusion. We This is where I try to weave. >> It's a little more complex. It's a little more complex than we usually see. So I need I need >> Sorry, I'm done. >> Okay. >> All right. Thanks, Steve. If you can
stop sharing this archive, it' be great. All right, Bill. >> I have nothing further, Mr. Chairman. Thank >> you, Courtney. Um this has been a struggle. Um
now my my only question here is I think everything balances out. It's um it's it's ready to put to bed. The only issue is that there's what's the total square footage of the mitigation over by that
hedge and this >> we'll work with her, Courtney. Don't worry about it. We'll get it done. >> What's that? Well, what I'm concerned about is its survivability in that location. And if it's only a minimal amount of of square
footage, it can be scattered around and added here and there and done. That can be worked out with staff. >> We will work it out with Miss Alcott. Courtney. >> Yeah. I think I think staff's concern was that it was while there's 14 ft from the house and while the hedges are the
neighbors property, there's some area underneath that I had planted. Um, you know, when you take out the >> steel boundary with the mulch, it allows more place. But I'll work with staff to make sure that everybody's happy with
those four plants. >> And if staff is happy and you're happy, I'm happy. Okay, no other questions. >> Oh, it's Steve. >> Courtney's happy. I'm happy. >> All right. Um, Jen, is there anything in
the chat? >> Nothing in the public chat, Mr. Chairman. >> All right. What's your pleasure? >> I'll make a motion to close the hearing and take it under advisement. >> Discal second. We have a motion to close the hearing and a second by Ron to take
it under close the hearing take it under advisement. Any other comments or questions by the commission? >> Okay, hearing none. I'll call the role. Courtney >> Bird I >> Patton I >> one >> I
>> Ronnie Ronnie froze on me here. Where's Ronnie? There >> I >> gave Bill. >> Duffy eye. >> And Robins's eye. Okay. Voted to close
this hearing. Thank you, Miss Alcott. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Good night, Miss Alcott. >> Good night. >> All right. Next up is a request to
extend an existing order of conditions. Frank uh G and Donna J. Skellyy of 369 Edgewater Drive West uh East Falmouth, Mass and D2-4558 requests a one-year extension. Jen,
>> yes, Mr. Chairman, we recommend a one-year extension. There are some issues on the property that we're working with the property owner um and their consultant to to um address >> birds. So move second. >> All right. Any comments or questions
from anybody? Nothing in the chat or anything. Jen, >> nothing in the chat. Mr. Chairman, >> we'll call the role to uh extend this um one-year extension. Uh Courtney >> Bird I >> Steve >> Patton I
>> Ron >> Piscll I >> Ronnie >> Bman I >> Dave >> K I >> Bill >> Duffy I >> and Robins is an I. Okay. Unanimous to grant the extension of one year. All
right. Next is request for certificate of compliance. Edwin um Escadarian 11 Tonset Road north of Mass uh request for a certificate of compliance for mass DP
number 25-4735. I think there's Mr. Ecadarian. He's there. Okay. >> Yep. I'm promoting Mr. Escadarian um to a panelist to address the compliance. Mr. Chairman and Alyssa is going to take this one for me.
>> All right. Thank you, Jen. Uh Alyssa. >> Yes. Um so before you tonight is a request for a certificate of compliance. Uh I have been working with Mr. Escandarian and his representatives to address um other non-compliance issues on site. Uh at this time um some of the
mitigation has and restoration have been replanted recently. So we are waiting to make sure that those plants do thrive and that the restoration and mitigation can grow to its uh full and mature form. The outstanding matter is that there is a fence along the southern property line
as shown in the staff report. A fence along the eastern property line had been there since at least 2005 per our uh available aerial imagery. Um at the time of reviewing for this notice of intent a handful of years ago, it was discovered
through aerial photos that a fence along the southern portion had been installed. Unfortunately, this is a velocity zone and this board typically does not allow fences to be installed. Um, this was discussed during the hearing. It was voted upon by the commission to require
it to be removed. Unfortunately, that was missed from the order of conditions as a special condition. Um, so it wasn't noted on the plan. It wasn't in the paperwork even though it was discussed. Um, something got lost in translation and at this time the fence is still present and has been elongated further
towards Taunt Road. Uh, Mr. Escandarian would like to make an argument to the commission to keep the fence. Um, the staff's position is simply that it is a velocity zone. It was required to be removed and can't be permitted per your regulations. Um, we did speak with Mr.
Escandarian today and Mr. Canarian, I'm going to send you a little popup window to help you unmute and turn on your video. >> Thank you. >> There we go. And here's one more for you. >> Start.
>> Okay, >> there you go. >> There you go, Mr. Escadarian. >> So, we would recommend to the commission um to hear out Mr. Escandarian and if you so chose to continue the hearing with permission from Mr. as Kandarian to visit the site uh see the fence and we
can send you all the proper permitting information and plans of reference. >> Right. >> Okay, Mr. Scaderian, I'll give you the floor. >> Well, thank you. Uh good evening everyone. Uh I appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. uh been
working very closely with Alyssa for the last year and a half and uh I think we've got most everything solved as she said except for the issue of the fence. Uh when we purchased this property uh the fence was there and it had been
extended I learned through uh Alyssa but not by us by the previous owner. It was a white 8-foot plastic solid fence. Um, and when we bought the property, uh, it just was an awful looking thing. And we
had no idea that a fence was not permitted. And, uh, our engineers never said anything and the builder never said anything. And I guess it's my responsibility to know that, but I didn't. So to finish off our property,
we took that fence down and extended it uh to Thompson Road. So it's running north to south. Uh, and I understand that uh it's not you're not supposed to have a fence there, but because it's perpendicular to the water, uh, we
thought it wouldn't be a problem uh, in terms of heavy water, heavy waves if they came on shore to knock it down because it would be perpendicular. But the reason we actually extended the fence was to protect our property one,
but most of all, my neighbor has small grandchildren, and she was as supportive of us expanding the fence to keep her kids, her grandkids on her property. She was afraid they'd wander off and get into trouble. Uh the other thing is
we're in a high wind velocity area there and as Lissa mentioned many of our plants have died. In fact, we've replaced onethird of all the plants we put into this property uh last summer.
Uh this fence does protect much of the plantings that are within 30 40 feet of it because it mitigates the wind. Um, and we think that is a good solution for the conservation of
the plantings and for us. Now, they suggest we put plants there, but plants we have trouble keeping anything alive. We planted four cedars, they all died. We planted them again, they died again.
Uh, we've replaced 35 plants. So, the fence serves two purposes. privacy, safety for our neighbors, kids, and protecting plantings. So, we would ask the commission to give us a waiver and
allow us to keep the fence. And that's our story. and I'm almost 90 years old and and I don't know how much longer I can go through this mitigation and stay alive, but I would like to get some um playback from the commission and
see if we can keep that fence. >> Okay, thank you. Um I I just have one question. You you say the fence is helping the mitigation that's planted there, but it's but it's still dying off. I thought you said
>> no not there where they're dying is along Sanuit where it's on the other side of our wall. We put 3540 plants there and already we replanted them and it's only been four weeks since we replanted them and about a third of them
are dead already. And we put a wind shield there. uh our landscaper and Alyssa was there and she agreed that if we put a windscreen and that is a five-foot burlap fence around our
plantings which we did and still a third of them are dead already and it's only been four weeks. We put extra large sprinklers in there to make sure they get enough water because it's very sandy and that hasn't solved the problem. So
wind is a major issue in in our on our property and I think Melissa Alyssa could uh confirm that. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Scadian. Um we'll start off with uh Ronnie. >> Thank you, Mr. Escadarian. I would like
to see it on a plan and see the site for starters. Like it's kind of hard for me to >> Okay. I'd love you to >> make a decision on that, but uh definitely go out and take a look at it for you. I would love you to do that. I appreciate it. In fact, I sent some pictures to Alyssa. U but I didn't bring
them to put I don't know really how to do this stuff. As I said, I'm 89 years old. I'm lucky I could even My kids were over here putting me on Zoom because I don't know how to do it. But if you would come, I would appreciate if any other of the commissioners would just come and look at the property and see
some of the difficulty of growing things on right by the water. It's very windy. >> Mr. Chairman, because the board doesn't have any of the information, usually we will, as Alyssa said, we'll send everyone the information. You can all go
out to the site. Mr. Escadarian welcomes the board to go out to the site. We'll send you over the plans. We'll send you over our concerns. Um there is a difference between where the mitigation was planting versus where it was approved
unfortunately. Um and I do think that in regards like in addition to the fence we're will be needing to work with Mr. Escadarian um to maybe relocate some of the plantings that are dying right along the area he was just talking about. But
instead, I mean, the commission doesn't really know anything, especially this commission won't know really anything about this project. So, at this point, um I think it's prudent to pick a continuing state. We'll send the board all the information. We'll send the pictures that Mr. Escadarian has sent
us. Um and the board can go out and review the site and let us know if you have any questions. >> I appreciate that. Thank you. >> Not a problem, Mr. >> Anybody feel about that? Does anyone have any questions they want to ask before we move on?
>> Yes. Dave, one one quick question. Well, if you don't mind, is is there a plan? U the the normal kind of plan we have. Fine. Okay. Yeah, we got to see. >> We got to see it. >> There's multiple plans. >> All right. >> Okay. >> Thank you very much. >> You're welcome, sir. Um what's your
pleasure? >> Alyssa, what did we have for a date? Um, I hadn't discussed one yet with Mr. Escandarian. Um, if we were to push this out um, like a week or two, would you be available on another Wednesday to join
us? >> Absolutely. Anytime that suits you. >> Okay. Um, with the commission like one week, two weeks to to go out and see the site. >> Well, we have a small workload last week and next week I I take it next week.
>> Yes. >> It'll probably be better than next week for me, I guess. >> Okay. Then um to the 17th. >> 17th. Okay. >> Next Wednesday. Miss Deskaring. >> Thank you very much. >> Not a problem, sir. >> Well, can somebody give me a motion? How
about Bill continue this to the applicant to uh September 17th? >> Bill. Bill. >> I want to say >> so. So, we have a motion by Ron, a second by Bill to continue to September
17th. Any other comments or questions? Um, hearing none. Um, I'll call a role. Courtney >> Bird I, >> Steve Patton, >> I >> Bman I. >> Dave >> Hi, >> Bill.
>> Duffy eye. >> Robins is an I. So, unanimous. We're going to continue this so we can all get a look at it until September 17th. >> Thank you, Mr. Escadarian. >> Thank you all very much. Appreciate it. >> Thank you, sir. >> Good night. >> All right.
>> Good night, sir. >> Continued hearings under an enforcement order. Um, first up is Anthony Rosi, 225 Lakeshore Drive, Fouth, Mass.
unpermitted removal of vegetation and unpermitted construction of landscape wall within a buffer to uh Jenkins Pond. Jen, >> yes, Mr. Chairman, we heard this under a notice of intent. The area has been planted, so we can kind of close this
enforcement order. >> That would be great. Now, we will still be working with them through the notice of intent process, the certificate of compliance process and all of that, but as far as actually dealing with the enforcement order that was dealt with through the notice.
>> All right, good. >> Do we need any action? >> Um, I think she was looking for a motion to close this. >> Just close it. Yes. >> I make a motion to close the enforcement order hearing. Okay. Okay. So, we have a
um motion to close and a second. Any other comments, questions? None. I'll call for the roll. Courtney >> Bird I. >> Steve. >> Patton. >> I. >> Ron. >> Driscoll. >> Iman. I
>> can't I. >> Bill >> Duffy I. >> And Robins is an I. Okay. Unanimous. that um enforcement hearing is closed for 225 short drive. Next up is Margaret
Bonfor I apologize my strong point. Um 30 Woodck Road found with mass unpermitted construction of a deck, patio and fence, reconstruction of a driveway and associated clearing veget
of vegetation and altering vegetation within a resource block. >> Yes, Mr. chairman. Uh like the last one, we handled this through a notice of intent hearing so the board can close this enforcement order and we are um
anticipating actually a request for a certificate of compliance shortly on this one. >> Okay. >> I'll make a motion to close out the enforcement order on Fenov. >> Thank you. Thank you.
>> Second. We have a motion and a second uh to close the hearing on 30 Woodeneck Road. Um any other comments or questions? Hearing none. I'll call a roll. Courtney I >> Bill >> Duffy I
>> Robins is a I. All right. Next stop has been um continued 42 Squib knocker drive that was in the beginning continued to make uh and then Steve Augusta at 33 Oyster
Shell Lane that's been continued uh until September 24th also. All right, next up is vote order of conditions Margaret C. Murray Revocable Trust 11 Bulock Street Mass Jen. Yes, Mr.
Chairman. Give me one moment, please. And find Bulock real quick. >> And the quorum is everyone. >> Thank you, Melissa. >> Bollock.
>> Is that off? Mayor Vista, is that the one? >> Yeah, I'm getting it. Sorry guys. Give me one second. It's a marrow plan. I just have to get ready. Oh yeah. Oh yeah. Um
this just had tiny little admissions. This was a Y project in the V zone. So it is a 22 square ft increase. The uh I think Tim was going to note on the plan.
We received a revised plan. >> What? Yeah, we Okay, perfect. We received the revised plan. There was supposed to be a placement of a tree, I believe, in the corner of the property >> that's on there, too. >> Yep. Perfect. And that's I think all I
have then. >> Anyone have anything else? >> So, the one with the overhang, right, Alyssa? Yeah, >> the center. >> The overhang. Yeah. >> And then um we just wanted to I think
Tim was going to note and had the discussion with the uh the clients that because they were turning um yeah something into a screened in porch.
um just kind of uh let them know that there shouldn't be any patios or anything closer to the resource area. But Tim was going to alert his clients. I don't think that needs to be written into the order. >> Anything else from the commission you
want to see in this order? >> All right. And I get a motion to uh >> motion issue order of conditions as discussed. Driscoll. >> Thank you, Ron. Thank you, Court. We have a motion, a second to issue order
conditions as discussed. Um, I'm going to go ahead and call a roll. Courtney >> Bird. >> Steve. Steve. We lost Steve. Uh, how about uh Ron? I >> bow an eye.
>> Dave >> Steve >> I >> Bill >> Duffy I >> Robins is an I. Um I don't know what happened to Steve but anyway it's uh it's unanimous to um not unanimous it's um six to one with Steve
unavailable I guess um to order uh issue order conditions for 11 Bulock Street. Next up is uh Chapo quite associates care of Dick Bossy 20 Associates Road Falmouth Mass Jen. >> Oh, we lost Steve.
>> I know. >> H Watch out for Maybe I'll pop back in. Uh this is fixing Big Pier down there over on Associates. Um,
it has the dune restoration. I was concerned with the compatibility of the sand that they would get to replace that dune. They're proposing to kind of remove the dune, set it off to the side, at least that sediment, and
then go through. This is where they are building that kind of inner tidal road to get out there and then working their way back using the the the stones from the inner title roadway that they're
building to rebuild Big Pier. Um where where's why? So they're not doing it by barge, but they are bringing a smaller barge in. um >> to put up the limit of work.
>> Yeah, that's for that um turbidity curtain around uh in front of the illrass. >> Yep. >> Uh we'll do uh preconstruction for both the pier and the dune restoration. The honestly I don't have that much concerned with the con the
reconstruction of the pier. We've seen or at least staff has seen hundreds and hundreds of these um including ones where they have built intertital roads to get out there. Um I'm actually more concerned with the dune restoration of
that area. So we'll be doing a pre-construction on that. No storage of uh of machines on the beach or the dune overnight. Courtney, you went on bio uh fuels. And the one thing that they
didn't really state um on that silk curtain is it should be a weighted silk curtain. I think that's just industry standard and given. Um but just make sure that's weighted down to protect that ill grass bed. Um that's kind of the gist of it. Um and
again I think it's going to be an important I can't remember did they say who they were going to do for big uh use for the reconstruction of Big Pier? I didn't think they had a contractor. Yeah, >> I think they talked and they talked to Briggs, but they didn't have a final final.
>> Okay. Yeah, the name. Yeah, I thought it might be Briggs, but I wasn't sure. Okay, >> that was one concern, too. >> Okay. >> What was that, Russ? I >> thought that was one of your concerns. Who the contractor was going to be? >> Yeah, who the contractor is and then who the dune restoration contractor is going
to be. So, we'll need approval on that one as well. >> Anything else? Okay, a motion motion to issue an order of conditions uh as discussed. >> Driscoll second.
>> We have a motion by Courtney and a second by uh Ron Driscoll. All right. Anything else? Nothing. I'm going to go ahead and call a roll. Courtney >> Bird I. >> Steve's not here, so I'm going skip over him. Ron
>> Driscoll. Driscoll. I >> Ronnie >> Balman I >> Dave >> I >> Bill >> Duffy I >> and Robins I >> All right we've issued order conditions for 20 Associates road. Next up is um
Mark A. STS stoves I'm sorry trust >> thou real estate trust second uh 106 lake road found with map >> is that that small lot
>> chairman this was just to clean up the lot a little after the fact unpermitted uh issues out there with some mitigation. Um we've worked with the applicant, Mr. Stove, uh to to and Tom to address
these. So, it's pretty straightforward. Um yeah, it's just a lot of little unpermitted um additions, sheds, deck extensions, and mitigation to go with it. Pretty straightforward. Jen, was that that
small undersized lot there? >> Is that the one I'm thinking of? >> Off of Lake Leman. >> Yeah, it is Lake Leman. Um, it's over I don't know which one you're talking about. Um,
>> all the way down at the end. >> Oh, the one all the way down on the left. Okay. Another one. Okay. Go ahead. Okay. >> You're thinking of um I think you're thinking of Lauren Straight. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Yeah. Okay. Right.
Anything else commission want to see? Hearing anything? So, I'm looking for a motion to issue the orders. >> Motion to issue an order of conditions as discussed. Driscoll. >> Second. >> Thank you, Ron. Thank you, Courtney. All right.
No other questions or comments? I'm going to go ahead and call the role. Courtney >> Bird I >> Ron >> Briscoll I >> money >> I >> Daves >> I >> Bill >> Duffy I >> Robins is a I and so we've issued order
conditions for 106 Lakeman. Next up is uh Nathan Hulcom 270 Sip Road Fouthmouth Mass. Jen. >> Yes Mr. Chairman this is the one with uh Mr. Burcelli and Crawford Land
Management. Um, at the last hearing, the board questioned why they did not um relocate the mitigation they have in the wetland area um to more in the lawn area as requested.
Um, I believe they just disagree with that and would like the board to condition it if that's how we feel. So, uh I believe the board would like um to condition um was it Alyssa the mitigation that's
currently proposed in the wetland and the invasive area to be relocated in the lawn area. >> Yeah, that would be per the regulations and for the quorum is Courtney, Ronnie, Ron, and Russ. We're just making it on
these two with four without Steve here. So that's it. >> All right. Discussion. Not hearing anything. So we're going to go. Bill, don't lose. Oh, we No, Bill's not. >> I just think we I go along with staff recommendations. Re relocate it. You
know, Mike was asking not to not to um continue it. So, we closed it and now we'll condition it. >> Absolutely. All right. Anything else? I'll >> make a motion to um issue an order. Just order conditions as discussed.
>> Driscoll second. >> Elissa, did you need to say something? >> I was just going to say to make a note that any future invasive species removal that has been occurring is to occur going forward with a permit. >> Yep. Okay.
>> Okay. So I got so I've got a a motion and a second and to issue the orders as per um staff's recommendation >> and discussed >> and discussed. Um so call a roll. Courtney
I >> Ron >> Driscoll I >> Ronnie >> Bman I >> and Robins is an I. So that's the quarter right Melissa. Yes. >> All right. So, we have issued order
conditions for 270 Sapora Road. Uh, next up is Dave Flareity. Flarity Environmental Services 84 Oldark Road, Falmouth, Mass. >> Yeah, >> got it right here. This is to permit
some after the lot of after the facts today. after the facts. Uh patio work took us a while to get here, but I think we have a plan that we can work with in
condition. They are going to need to remove some of the patio steps that are moving closer to the resource area. The the um mitigation is proposed in the back. Um are they proposing a kind of
separation most from that back? Uh >> yes, >> mitigation um in uh excuse me, the back invaded area. Um we're removing those steps over there. They're putting a pergola over the patio. And then we just
need replanting on that front slope that faces the salt marsh that was previously vegetated with all sorts of ivy that is currently lawn. So we will work with the property owner to get that vegetated. Anything I'm missing?
>> Uh, quum is Courtney, Ron, Russ, and Ronnie. >> I'll make a motion to issue an order of conditions as we have discussed extensively. >> Driscoll second. >> Thank you. Thank you, Ron.
Any other discussion? Hearing none, I'm going to call the role. Courtney >> bird eye. >> Ronis eye. Ronnie >> Bowman and I. >> Robbins is I. So we have issued order conditions for 84 Old Dock Road.
Anything else? >> I'll make a motion to adjurnn. >> Well, we have a motion to and a second from Bill. >> Second. >> I >> Duffy. Hi. >> I
>> think we got it all. Thank you very much >> as always guys. Thank you very much. Have a great night. It >> was a blast. Blast. [Music]