Okay, good evening. >> Sorry for the delay. Um, with this is conservation commission meeting on Thursday, February 5th. We're just going to begin right away. Uh, we have the Girl Scouts of Eastern Massachusetts Troop 70976
who are here to talk about their proposed bat boxes at Sandy Pond Recreation Area. You want to introduce yourselves and then tell us what you want? Um, hi. My name is Kayla. Um, we're part of the Girl Scout troop.
>> Can you talk into the mic? >> 70976. >> I'm Kaylee and we're Girl Scouts of Troop 70976. >> Hi, I'm Addison and I'm also part of Troop 70976. >> Thank you.
You might be asking yourself, what might the silver award be? Well, it is the highest honor a Girl Scout 6th through 8th grade can earn. It requires a team or individual project. It has to be approximately 50 hours per Girl Scout. There's also a deadline, which for us is in September. There are also action
steps to achieve the silver award. Identify a community issue. Work individually or in a small group. As said before, develop a project that can and will change the environment. It also needs sustainability. Submit a project proposal to the council, the town before
beginning. Lastly, execute the project and submit a final report. This is our silver award project. The bat house plan. We have found a problem and a solution. The problem is the mosquito population is going up in alarming rates over the years. The solution is identifying the main
predator which Bats. Another problem is bats have been taking refuge in people's chimneys. The solution is to build batous away from people's houses. That is a longer bat. >> We're here to fix the mosquito problem. We're going to help lower the population
by housing their biggest predators, bats. >> We are building bat houses to help with the mosquitoes. Bats have a problem with humans. Bats also have been burrowing and making homes in people's chimneys. We're also putting the bat houses on
poles, not trees. We will be doing our project at Sandy Pond Recreation Area in West Charm, Massachusetts. We will be putting the houses up around late winter or early spring. We are selling Girl Scout cookies to raise funds, taking donations to
purchase the materials to build the batous or buying batous pre-built. We are going to build a bat house or pre-built one. So, so by the end of the project, we will have three batouses located around the pond.
We are helping the community by lowering the mosquito population and unblock unblocking people's chimneys. We're also helping the bats by giving them a home to keep them warm from cold winters, cool from hot summers, and shelter from the harsh weathers weather climates.
Also raise more and more generations of bats. Thank you so much. Do you have any questions, comments, or concerns? >> Thank you. >> Have any questions or comments?
>> Are you having fun? >> Yes. >> How many mosquitoes do bat the average bat eat at night? >> Do you know? >> Hundreds. >> Probably. Is that Do they eat Do they
come out at night to do the >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. They're nocturnal. >> Well, this is great. We always could use uh environmental um solutions to to this rather than using sprays and stuff like
that. So, there's one as many speaking for the commission. We're very happy that you're doing this and we'd love to see the final report. Do we have to take a vote? >> Yeah, >> that'd be great. >> Do we have to take a vote in accepting the project? Anybody want to make a
motion? >> Make a motion to accept a project to build batouses on Sandy Pond. >> I'll second that. Okay. >> All in favor? >> I opposed. Thank you. >> Good luck. >> Oh, how much money do you need? How much
money? How many Girl Scout cookies do you need to sell? >> I mean, donations we're probably getting will be put in. >> Yeah, >> I've got you. >> Thank you.
>> I'm stuck in another meeting with remote access. We start the hearings. We don't have remote. >> We do. If you could just say it on so that the public knows. We have >> inerson meeting >> with remote access. >> With remote access. Okay. So, I just want to say there's an inerson meeting
with remote access. Also, you can see there are people on on uh on Zoom. So, um we're going to begin with a continued notice of intent. SC832509 JM O'Reilly and Associates for Paul and
Nancy Cruz for Glenwood Street proposed deck expansion added addition shed sand nourishment invasive species management in the velocity zone and buffer zones to a salt marsh. If you could introduce yourselves and
>> Yes. Good evening. Uh, my name is Matt Frell from JM O'Reilly Associates. Um, to my right is Caitlyn >> Caitlyn Cameli with Blueax Design >> and I think online is Teresa Sprag from
Blue Flax. Um, also the owners in the audience, Paul and Nancy Cruz. So, this property is located at the end of Glenwood Street frontage on Lewis Bay. Um, served by an existing single family dwelling, an
existing raised septic, stone reventment along the south side of the property. Um, Mr. and Mrs. Cruz purchased the property about a year ago and um inherited old enforcement order from the commission.
Um there's a pre-existing plan. It's approximately 1,00 to,200 square ft of mitigation required. Um so the existing dwelling is located in the buffer zones to a salt marsh
coastal bank and the entire site is located in the velocity zone elevation 13. So the proposal is to leave the existing structure um and renovate the interior and exterior. Um on the south side, we're proposing to
remove the existing landing and two sets of stairs and the existing brick patio and build a new deck and stairway off the west side. On the west side of the house, we're proposing to remove the existing hot
tub, grill patio. Um we're also proposing to expand the existing deck there uh by about 7 feet total of 94 square ft. On the north side
um we're proposing to remove an exterior step and stairway and make the um interior kitchen a little bit bigger in that area. So, removing the step and stair and then just bumping out the corner of the house about 17 square ft.
Um, we're also we're adding a a outside shower rin station on the north side. Um, and then a proposed 8 by12 shed. Um, we are proposing to capture all the roof
runoff with gutters, down spouts, and drywalls. Currently, everything just kind of pours onto the ground. Um, and then Blue Flax has put together a mitigation and planting plan. So, I'll hand it over to Cece now and she can kind of review that with you folks.
>> Great. Thanks, Matt. Um, so our plan is proposing a total of 3,300 square feet of invasive species management and native plant restoration. Um, which um in the previously approved
restoration mitigation plan there was about,00 square feet of uh mitigation proposed. So we are um taking that and adding on to it uh tripling that amount. Um we're proposing invasive species
management in the dark green hatched area just adjacent to the salt marsh where we've observed bittersweet black swallow wart and fragmmites. So we're proposing to manage that in approximately 794 square feet.
Just adjacent to that, we're proposing to create a vegetated buffer strip where there currently is lawn. This area will be about 966 square feet uh to be restored with native uh plants, shrubs.
And then in the area just to the um east of that is Yeah, thank you. In the lighter lighter green area, we're proposing to remove existing lawn and rugosa rose and replant with native uh
perennials, shrubs, and a grass and wildflower seed mix. Um, and then moving south, there is a cluster of rugosa rose in the other light green area. We're proposing to remove that and restore
that with native vegetation. And then in the tan area, we're proposing to restore this space with American beach grass and add um approximately I think it's 17 cubic
yards of sand uh to help aid with the um establishment of the beach grass. Um the existing fire pit area in the corner is to remain. Um, this area is used frequently by the homeowners and it's an
important sitting space for them. Um, and so we are proposing to keep that space. Um, and the space above the the leech field, the septic back up in that corner. Yeah. Uh
we're going to enhance that just to make it aesthetically more pleasing and uh create a small seating area in the center of it with a micro clover fescue lawn and um native a native flower
garden around that. So that is what we are proposing for this plan. Happy to answer questions that you may have and >> I'll just take it from here. Um, so to conclude, uh, we had a little bit
of time since our last continuence. We did have a chance to meet with Britney last week. We understand the, you know, your your regulations of, you know, no no structures in the velocity zone and the 35 foot no disturb zone. Um, so we
have requested a variance for that work. Um we hope that what we're doing to the site, you know, can allow the commission to uh approve the variance um for the construction work. Um
as CC stated, uh Blue Flax is specked about 3,000 square foot of mitigation. Um um where 1200 about 1,200 was required from the old enforcement order. So, it's
about 1,800 square feet overall. Um, and at that we'll open it up to questions from the commission. >> Thank you. >> Anybody want to start or go ahead? >> Okay. Um, I'm looking at the drawing
that has the area calculations table on it. Is that on there? I was just trying to reconcile that uh with the description. Um C could you walk me through
the mitigation? Uh there it's there it says uh proposed mitigation the 966 square feet. >> Yeah, that's just part of it. The 966 square feet is which part of the mitigation?
>> Part of it. It's on another is it on another sheet or something? >> It is not on another sheet. When I put this plan together, >> I was under the assumption that that was the total mitigation that they're proposing, but it's much much more than that. >> So, is that this light brown? >> It is.
>> 966 is that vegetated buffer strip. And then um because I think it might might have been confusing because I broke out each kind of hatched area in square footage but the total mitigation that we are offering is 3,300 square ft.
>> That's okay. I was just confused with the table. >> Yes, I understand that was Yeah. >> Um and then my last question was the detail on that on that sheet the the erosion control detail. You mentioned that you had
a buffer or swale or how does this work? What is the direction of the flow? What is what is that doing? This erosion control detail. >> Well, basically it's a it's a silt fence. >> Okay.
>> Um this is a a 9-in round straw waddle. So, it's like a a hay tube, if you will, 9 ft around. And then that's staked in place. um along the limit of work line. So if
any if uh if there's any stockpile material, which I'm sure you're going to condition it so we can't have any stock, but if there's any erosion or a storm that happens when construction is going on, it would protect the resources >> just for during construction and then it
will be removed. >> Correct. >> Okay. It's for Okay. And it isn't for water flow or anything directional like that. Yeah, it's just for construction. >> I just wasn't just wanted to make sure. So, thank you.
>> You're welcome. Anybody else? >> Um, sure. I'll go if that's okay. >> Yeah. >> Uh, just to kind of go off of Ellie's question about the the mitigation table. Um, I don't believe the uh
the hot tub was previously permitted. So, and I think that calculation was put into the mitigation table. So, I think we just need to kind of tweak those numbers a little bit um with the permitted versus unpermitted structures and and stuff like that.
>> Yeah, it just it gets kind of messy. I mean, the owners bought the house with the hot tub there, so >> understandable. Um, I I understand there's no paperwork um or it wasn't previously approved, but in our eyes, we're we're removing that whether it was
put there with a permit or not. Um, I mean, I can subtract the numbers out if that helps, but um it's an existing structure that we're taking out. >> Does that include the fire pit?
>> No, the fire pit is proposed to remain But is it included in your calculations? >> Is not anybody >> else? So I have a couple of questions and issues. Um my main issue is that you the
whole property is in the velocity zone. Um, I have trouble with you keeping the uh fire pit because I think the reason we have a velocity zone is make sure things aren't uh spread out in case of a major storm. Um, I I the driveway I
think is impervious. Am I right? >> The paved driveway. Yeah. >> Yeah. Maybe uh would help if you made the driveway impervious. >> Pervious. >> Yeah. >> Um I mean made the driveway pvious.
Sorry, use the wrong words. Um, and I also have trouble with the shed in the back, too. I don't have a problem with the tiny addition of the rinse station. Um, but I do have trouble with the shed in the back because, again, it's in the velocity zone. I know it's tough because I live in a postage stamp
um property too without a basement and thank goodness I can have a shed. But um there are reasons why we have the regulation. And uh my last issue is the is the fact
that you want a deck versus a patio. And uh again it's a velocity zone issue for me. My question is my one question has to do with the amount of um in the previous approved plan that they never previous
owners I understand never finished it was 1100 square 100 square feet and you're doing 3,300 um is that calculation of 3,300 because you you're going to have more
um take away more um is places to plant I mean take more places that you're building or is that what how you came to the 3300 or is it part of the plan to protect the property as from storms too? Yes, the 3,300 is the the 1,200 is
almost existing uh in the TAN which was on the previously approved plan and we're just increasing that and we feel that adding that vegetated buffer strip is more valuable than the previously approved mitigation plan because we're
enhancing the value of the health of the salt marsh by removing lawn and creating a vegetated buffer strip that will slow water and uh storm storm water and filter before reaching the salt marsh. Um, >> okay.
>> So, yeah, just to be 100% clear, there's 12 ft of lawn area approximately 11 12 feet wide that they're taking out and vegetating. Well, I'm going to be honest with you, and I'm talking for myself, not for the other commissioners, but I would not approve this as it stands with
the shed and the uh p I would like to see a patio instead of a deck. And um um and I'd like to see the driveway being made pvious and I I'd be more likely to consider okaying it. As I
said, I'm I'm okay with the rinse station and the tiny addition, which I believe next to the rent station. Um, but I'm speaking for myself. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Chairman. If I may,
>> um, I would actually be okay with the the shed where it's located just because it is next to uh the the concrete wall. Um, so it if there were to be flood waters, it's
there already is a structure there that it would the water would be running into. >> Um, so I'm less concerned about that. Um, but I do second your your comment about having the pvious driveway.
Those are just my thoughts. >> Anybody else? Well, it's a complex structure, a site and uh, of course, it would never be built
and um, today and we know storms are coming. So, I agree. Well, you could put that shed in there, but it needs to be anchored. There's no
way you're not going to get a storm up there that's going to unless you put in concrete footings and things, it's just going to disappear. So, I think that um and and the fire
pit, it's just it's dangerous. It's uh things, you know, you might leave a chair out there and a storm comes along and you're not home. And so it's really a hard situation for you as
new owners. But on the other hand, I think that we need to give a little, take a little, and I would agree with pretty much what Dave is saying. And um if you anchored the shed, maybe that also.
I think I'd be like to see a new plan with see what an anchorage shed would look like and get some information about that. >> So, some details about how it would be anchored. Is that >> Yeah.
And then consider the um pvious driveway um and for me a plan without the um fire pit. Well, unfortunately, the fire pit is one of the prize sites on the house. They
spend a lot of time there, and I I I will say that that they really um like that part of the property and use it. >> Is there such a thing as a non-permanent fire pit? The one that you >> non-permanent.
>> Yeah, I think that the homeowners are are open to creating a non-permanent fire pit like a solo stove. >> Storm coming and they know it. Put it in the shed. >> Just come to the microphone since you're the homeowner so we can hear you. Thank you.
>> Thanks Mike. >> Paul Cruz. I'm one of the owners with my wife. Um the actual fire pit, the stone there, we have no problems removing that. It's more the location of sitting with a family and watching the sun sets. So, the actual removing the the actual
fire pit, I I agree with you. I don't want those stones flying in a storm. So, it was more the location that we were concerned with. Um, and I agree, you know, Mr. Frost, about anchoring the shed. I'd like to keep my shed. Um, with regards to the impervious
driveway, I mean, I can discuss with my wife that could be an option also. And with regards to the decks, um, if I may, we're we're proposing there's the two the walk out on those two front steps
that Britain, you just had that foot. You go that to that. Yeah, right there. Um, we're proposing getting rid of the bricks because again, we also don't want those flying around, too. And basically extending out on both of those sides,
probably about five feet on each side. um and creating just that and the the width I believe is about the same. I think it's about six feet, five, six feet. Um so that would be that and you know we figure it's like we don't want the you know the brick we will make that you know the fescue lawn um or sand I
don't know what was on the plan and then the I understand Mr. Bower about the hot tub. It was there and we met with Brandon before we bought the house. Um, is I don't know if you're familiar I'm sure you're all familiar with this property
and the problems that the property had. We're trying to make this a great property. At the same time, you know, protect that salt marsh. Um, because there are issues in that salt marsh. And that's why, you know, when we met with
Blue Flax, we wanted to do it was like, well, we don't need to do 3,000 square feet. No, I understand that, but we want this aesthetically pleasing. We want it to be safe and we want it to protect both the salt marsh and the home. Um, >> is your proposal to get rid of the hot tub? >> Yes. >> Okay.
>> No, the hot Yeah, the But we were extending the deck about six or seven feet uh into that >> into where the hot tub >> into where the hot tub is. It's just a continuation of that deck. >> How high is the two decks going to be off the ground? >> The same. >> Which is how high?
>> I I don't have a measurement. >> Three and a half ft. Um, yeah, we weren't looking to just basically extend the deck, resecure the new pieces, and the front deck would have been the same, you know, the same height that it is on that. And
that's it. >> Anybody else in >> Britney? Um, yes, we did meet and we discussed some plan revisions. Um, from my perspective, just to meet our plan requirements. Um, I'd like the buffer
zone lines to be edited so that we can clearly see the zones of the 35 like we discussed. Um, and definitely the mitigation table that we've been talking about to eliminate the unapproved previous cover areas and clarify the
mitigation planting total. um what's for this project minus the what we have for the enforcement order and having a total there to match the blue flex plan which she has it called out in the notes all how it's separated just to have that everything in one place on the approved
plan and that those are all my comments just to remind the commission this is a variance request for both the velocity zone regulations and the 35 foot no disturb buffer thank you >> in The audience have comment a question.
Having seen none, anybody on Zoom raise your hand. I don't see anybody raising their hand. All right. Young eyes. Thank you. >> Um, okay. So, what I'd like to see is a
continuation continuence to have the new new plans with what we've discussed and uh do you want to get up the calendar to see when they could do that? >> We've got the 19th is the next meeting in two weeks. So revised plans would be
due in one week or the March 5th and they'd be due the 26th. >> I'm not here on the 5th, but you can just think of my schedule probably. >> Okay. So, you're okay not being here for
the fifth? >> March 5th. >> There's also March 19th. >> March 19th. >> Okay. Yeah, we'll take the fifth. I can always zoom in. >> I'm sorry. >> So, which day do you >> The fifth.
>> The fifth. Okay. So, can I hear a um motion to continue to the 5th? >> I move we continue this project to uh March 5th. >> Okay. Second, anybody? >> I'll second that. >> Everybody in favor?
>> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Next order of business is interflu for town of Yamoth 110 wear road proposed ecological restoration including Karenberry bog and stream
restoration removal of t tidal restrictions and water control structures undersized culvert replacement and public access components. in the BVW, salt marsh, riverfront area,
land underwater bodies and coastal bank. It's a lot of words here. And land subject to coastal study. >> Good evening. My name is Rick Bishop. I'm the executive director for the Friends of Bass River. And to my right is uh
Nick Nelson from the he's a geomorphologist with the Interflu Firm. Uh this evening I'd like to put into context some of the details of the the project before Nick takes over for the formal presentation. In 20 excuse me
2020 the friends of Bass River identified the opportunity and the importance of uh restoration of the upper Bass River headwaters area. it was a significant uh water quality issue at the end of Bass River and this would be a solution to or one of the solutions to
that those challenges. Um in that year of 2020 we identified the opportunity to uh fund a preliminary design for this solution through something called a SNEP grant. Uh thanks
to uh input from Nick Nelson of Interflu, Eric O'hen from Tyenbond, Ardan Herren from Woodsole Group, uh Kelly Grant, the former town of Yarmouth conservation administrator. Uh we were able to successfully apply for funding
for this preliminary design. uh it was approximately $300,000 as a way to get the the project underway and to kind of understand some of the opportunities we would have for for solving the issues we were we're facing over the course of these six years which
doesn't seem possible. It's gone by so quickly. Uh we've made a lot of great progress. We've had great support from um the town of Yarmouth, the town of Dennis CPC. Um funding from a number of federal and state sources. Uh we had the great fortune to be selected by mass
deer and were awarded priority project status for the upper bass river headarters restoration and that's taken us a provided a lot of great technical re resources as well as uh some funding. Again we're uh we're now at
approximately 90% design standards for the project and that's where we're now entering the uh um permitting phase. And at this point, I'd like to hand it off to Nick, who can take us in the presentation. Thank you. >> Thank you, Rick. Uh, thank you all for
hearing us. My name is Nick Nelson, geomorphologist with Interflu, a river and wetland restoration firm. Uh, I'm going to walk us through this project and I'll try to keep it to about 15 minutes or so. Um, so I'll try to keep
track on my watch so I don't go over. Uh, my hope is to give you a tour of this site as it's a little bit tricky to do so right now with all the snow out there and then um provide a summary of the designs and then go through some uh
existing project examples that have some similar elements to this one itself. Um as big picture uh thinking about where we are in the watershed here. This project is at the upper end of the Bass River wershed uh where it's called
Hamlin's Brook. And you may have also heard that there's uh discussions about replacing the North Dennis Road crossing uh further downstream. That one is not part of this particular project. Uh it's adjacent. So you will be hearing about
that later time. Uh but today we're going to be focused on the abandoned cranberry bogs and crossings that are in the headwaters. Um and so generally u uh big picture here this is a ecological restoration
project. We're applying for an ecological restoration uh order of conditions. And as with many of the other similar projects, the goals for this effort are to improve resiliency for uh climate uh change and sea level
rise as well. Uh improve water quality, improve passive recreation, improve fish passage through these areas. Lots of other elements that go along with uh holistic restoration. Uh we've got a a large team as is common with these projects as well. I may have
missed a few team members here. We have some in the audience and online as well. Uh both project partners at the top upper left there, town of Yarmouth, Friends of Bass River, Mass Division of Ecological Restoration and the coastal zone management as well. On the design
side, we have been leading the ecological restoration of the retired cranberry bogs. Uh Tyen Bond has been leading the uh replacement designs for the Weir road crossing which is right here in the middle. and Stimson
Associates is a landscape architecture firm that has been leading the designs for the pedestrian crossings. Um, these are some examples of other projects that have gone through the uh ecological restoration notice of intent. There are likely others, but these are
other retired cranberry bug projects that have gone through this as well. So, it's not a new process uh or it's it is a relatively new process, but it's been going through over the last year or so. of a number of examples here which is great.
Um so I'm going to bring you through a picture tour here and you'll notice uh in a number of spots where uh it looks looks pretty nice. Uh you might wonder why we are doing this restoration project and uh why change what already
looks to be decent habitat. Uh, and so some of the elements that are degrading the habitat here are a little bit tricky to see because this site has been abandoned for over 50 years. So there's been a lot of plant growth, uh, a lot of recovery since that time. Uh, but in
this particular picture, we're starting in the upstream end of the project site. We're looking at a portion of Miss Thatcher's pond. Uh, and what you don't can't really see very well is a big patch of invasive fragmmites over here,
as well as the dam and fish ladder that uh restrict flow on the downstream end. Uh, so this is part of an earth & burm here, a concrete dam and fish ladder. Um, just on the downstream end of that.
If we continue to move downstream and um we see a former cranberry bog here. Again, doesn't look like it, but there are ditches throughout here. This is the stream channel. And this is actually an example of a narrow spot
here where some large wood here fell in and uh created a bit of a constriction. This gives us a sense of what the channel dimensions should be in this area. And that is the designed channel dimension. uh in this particular area. You'll see in other locations where the
existing channel is overwidened um in uh further downstream locations. Again, this is a wetland upstream of Weir Road. This is actually a location where we won't be touching anything here at all. This is uh a part of uh the
former cranberry bog again uh but not in an area that we will be disturbing. So, that will uh remain as is but evolve over time. Uh as these conditions shift close to weir road we can see the earthn
berm here that separates the waterway on this side from the wetland on the other side. This is a burm that will go away uh during construction as part of these designs. Uh that is something that prevents water flow right now and
prevents that continuity of flow. Um, and this is Weir Road. Uh, so this is the small culvert underneath the road. Again, hard to really see the covert or the condition of it. Uh, but suffice it to say, it's, uh, much too
small for the waterway here. And this is, uh, one element of of replacement and, uh, with a larger crossing here. Downstream. Weir road, uh, is a pretty special place also. and we have minimal
uh disturbance in this area. Uh this this is a location a really good example of some of the microtopography that occurs in uh wetlands and this is uh some of what we'll be trying to recreate in some areas. So uh nearby this
particular spot is uh another location if the slide would shift. There we go. Uh of ditches. So these you can see those former uh cranberry bog ditches. And so there are elements of this section downstream of Weir Road where we'll be filling these ditches, plugging
these ditches, and doing some of that microtopography uh within those areas or or adjacent to those areas of ditch fill. It's not going to be like you'll see on some of the other projects where there's disturbance everywhere. This is sort of a selective go in fill some of these
ditches, do some microtopography to break up that sand layer that was laid on the cranberry bugs and uh in increase the uh the ecological function there. The stream channel in this location gets
wider downstream of weir road. Uh in the proposed condition, this will become more and more tidal over time. So we do not plan to uh uh adjust the channel for most of that area downstream of weir
road. Uh so this is the channel width. That's what the channel width will be afterwards. Uh that will remain as is. Um this is uh the earth and berm and stream crossing as you connect from
Cheyenne Road or Cheyenne Lane to Nullwood Drive. And uh that little tiny pipe that you see under there is what's conveying Hamblin's brook right now. Uh it's pretty squashed and plugged up. Hard for fish to get through there. So
this will be removed and there'll be another location where uh the burm will be cut and a larger crossing will be put in. These are some of the upland mounds uh downstream of that earth and burm that were part of the farming disturbance. Uh
this is an area of staging that you'll see in the plans and these mounds will be removed. The earth will be used to fill uh the ditches nearby. Any wood that is needing to be cleared as part of
the staging areas and other work will be worked into the channel habitat and floodplane habitat. This is just an example of some of the flow control structures throughout the site. This is what disrupts flow, blocks flow, blocks fish passage when there are boards put in there. Uh and so all of these flow
control structures and berms uh will be removed. Um, moving downstream from that earthn berm between Cheyenne Lane and Nullwood. Again, a series of earthn BMS separating wetlands on either side. Uh, this is the
area on the drawing set where you'll see the boardwalk that Stimson designed. Uh, it's not a boardwalk for the entire area, but portions of this burm will come out and sections of boardwalk put in place. So that will be able to allow for full
connectivity between those areas. This is at the far downstream end looking upstream at the channel. You'll see a lot of fragmitees up here. That will be part of the treatment uh for this area. But no real work done in the stream channel here itself. Uh just invasive
plant management and then removal of the earth and berm at the downstream end. So that was sort of a review of kind of site conditions, current site conditions as you go from the upstream end of Miss Thatcher's pond past the dam and fish
ladder here across we road across the earth and burm and down into mil pond. Currently the system is tidal up to this earth and burm but that crushed culvert blocks things.
Uh so I'm going to start with overview of the designs from the upstream end moving downstream. And just these are not engineering designs I'm showing you because you have those in front of you but this is for the broader audience to give a general idea
of what we're planning on. Um this portion of Miss Thatcher's pond here will remain unchanged. We recognize the value of that open water uh for water foul and for other uh ecosystems in that area. Uh and the dam in this location
will be removed. So this open water here will be reduced to a smaller open water and deeper pond here with a meandering channel upstream and downstream of that point. Uh the burm along this location here will be removed and a a trail with with
no uh infrastructure uh but a trail through that on the uh forested area will be available for pedestrian use from weir road to connect over in this area. So these trails will still remain
accessible to uh land owners. As I mentioned, we road will be replaced with a much larger crossing, and I'll show you that in a moment. As we move downstream into cell five, uh again, um
less disturbance, so no uh no channel construction through this dashed area. Uh a little bit of channel construction at the downstream end here as you go through a new crossing to replace that undersized culvert at that earth and burm. And then uh the new channel as it
comes underneath weir road here to connect with the existing channel. This burm on the uh southern and eastern edge will be removed and pushed into the ditch here to remove that uh ditch along the edge. And then there'll be some
areas of uh invasive plant management um and ditch filling, ditch plugging and microtopography. Uh there'll be some filling of ditches here and microtopography on this side as well. U pedestrian crossing number two will go
here. Sorry, I forgot to mention in the where the dam currently is at the upstream end. That is where pedestrian crossing number one will go. So, this is pedestrian crossing number two that allows pedestrians to continue uh walking through the site,
moving downream into cells six and seven. We'll have pedestrian crossing number three that goes uh over that earth and burm connects that earth earth and burm. So, that access will remain. And then we'll have the boardwalk that extends
along this burm here where portions of that burm will go away and the ditch that you see just to the south that will get filled in with the earth that comes out of the uh burm there. Mostly invasive plant removal uh in that location. Earth and berm removal
at the downstream end. And then where these big pine trees are over here, some sand removal and ditch filling as that has become more of an upland area instead of a wetland. Uh so with all of this done in this area, we'll see more um title uh conveyance in this area,
especially as North Dennis Road uh gets replaced in the future and they'll have connectivity here rather than blockages of flow with this burm. Uh this is one typical detail of the weir road crossing. So this is a
cross-section looking at a weir road developed by time bond. Uh they are uh joining us virtually and can show more details if there are questions about this later. But what we're looking at here is the top of the road surface here.
The new water line which will go in this location here which is a little bit higher than where it is right now. Currently it's down in this elevation. Uh and this will be the structure that will be put in place. This arch with
footings here, the total span of that arch is 24 feet wide. It provides a 14t wide channel top to top of bank to top of bank with a terrestrial bench on each side so that turtles, raccoons, otter,
other critters can move through weir road without having to go up and over the road. the pedestrian crossings. Sorry. Uh we walked through those before. In terms of the location, we have pedestrian crossing one at the upstream end here. Two uh just
downstream of Weir Road, number three at the Earth & Burm down there, and the boardwalk further downstream. Uh crossings one and two are very similar in that uh it's uh just a pedestrian crossing with no handrailings because they'll be low to the flood plane.
And this is what they will look like. Come on. Um sensitive. Okay, there we go. Uh so we have in cross-section at the top and then looking down on it uh for the bottom image there. Uh bit of a unique
design here where there are logs uh interlocking on the edges and then uh boards for walking across on top uh and just a small rail on the edge so you don't roll off it or walk or step over it. U and then crossing number three is
a little bit higher because it's connecting along the earth and berm. So it's going to be higher off the channel and therefore we have a handrail on either side of the crossing there. uh the boardwalk. Uh this is one section of the boardwalk shown here. There will
be four boardwalks as shown in the design drawings at different lengths to span the different uh cuts in the earth and burm. Um this is designed as as wooden piles with the boardwalks uh boardwalk in
between those piles uh that uh go in that kind of crisscross fashion. in there. You can see the supporting structures underneath that cross underneath there with the plankings on top. Uh the walkway is about 4T wide.
Uh and okay, so that was sort of a summary of the designs and we can answer lots of questions, but I did want to show you some images of past projects uh to to see what uh has been going on elsewhere in the region. We've been working on
these types of projects since the first one in 2007 which was Eel River in Plymouth. These images here that you see are Tidm Marsh Farms which was done in 2016. Different from your from our site here in that these were recently farmed
uh just prior to construction. So uh you can see kind of the recent farmland there. Lots of disturbance, full channel reconstruction. Um but very soon after construction, you can see how quickly it rebounds. So
this is uh just uh a year or so after construction. Um and you can see all the vegetation that comes up. None of that was planted. That all came up from the seedbank. And this is Eel River 12 years after construction. Here 17,000 Atlantic white
cedar trees were planted. They were 3t tall at the time. Now they're about 30 feet tall and recreating an Atlantic white cedar swamp with copious spagnum moss and cranberries and all sorts of other plants growing. Again, our site here at Bass River is uh
has been abandoned for 50 years. More similar to Coldbrook and Haritch at this location, which was abandoned for about 20 plus years before construction here. Uh so you can see prior to construction, lots of trees, looked great, lots of habitat there, but again it had a lot of
the same fish passage constrictions and ecological impairments as the Bass River during construction disturbance um with pond creation, channel reconstruction, uh stream crossings, microtopography
uh and then 3 months after construction, we can see the plant growth right away. Comes right up. Uh this was done last year. If you go back there now, it's even more so. It's green. Uh this is the salt marsh portion of this project with a new uh title channel created. And then
just a few months after construction, if it will go. There we go. Uh and so this has really greened up since this these pictures were taken as well. Uh a dozen or so dragonfly species have been identified out there. river otter,
swans, ducks, uh many species have been found at this site. Um and so that is what we wanted to spin through here. There's one more slide. Um a couple shots of Kunameset also
which is similar and that was abandoned about 15 years 20 years prior to construction as well just to show you how quickly these sites rebound. Um this crossing here, not exactly what we're going to see at Weir Road, but the similarities being that Tyian Bond
designed this one and we were designing the ecological restoration. This was a series of tiny little pipes and opened up to a much larger crossing. Again, not the same designs as the weir road, but similar idea. uh and other examples of pedestrian
crossings that we've seen at other sites as well designed by Stimson. Uh our project schedule, we're in permitting right now certainly and uh as Rick said, we've been at this for a number of years. Um the weir road crossing will also be going through the
chapter 85 process with mass dot and we hope to go to bidding towards the end of this year and begin construction. And um Rick, was there anything else that you wanted to add? >> Yes. Um beyond the water quality improvement that this project will
achieve, um the fish habitat restoration is is really really significant. In 1853, Hamlet's Brook, which is the brook that uh Nick was describing earlier, had the second largest herring catch in all of Massachusetts. Last spring, I saw three herring trying to get through that
collapsed uh culvert. So, we're really excited about the possibility of reestablishing this fish habitat. In the Kunameset River, they opened up that culvert on April 1st. On an April 7th, they had herring. So, it's a real important opportunity for the fish habitat to return there as well as the
the water quality improvement. >> Thank you, Nick. >> Happy to take any questions and I know we have partners on the line that can show more details for the weir road crossing as well if you'd like. >> To let you know, we still haven't got a D number. So, we'll definitely have to
continue because of that. >> We'll go from there. Questions? Sure. Um, so was it ever discussed just sort of big picture, was it ever discussed to have the structures as a separate
application, the bridges? I guess this is for Britany. Was there so this whole thing is okay. This it's a lot. Um, but first I I commend you for this the amazing incredible survey that you have
done. um and the sequence sequencing of the cells and and determination of of of that. Um and could you talk a little bit about how you came to uh this alternate being the you didn't speak of the
alternates not that we want to talk about the alternates that are preferred but >> sure >> could you just speak to about why this alternate was decided upon it was pro it's probably worth mentioning >> absolutely >> of it yeah >> yeah no great question I I think for many of these projects there's probably
three primary alternatives um one is you know really simply removing the flow control structures and barriers to flow and just letting the site kind of mature in whatever trajectory it goes. Uh the
other is sort of full um impact for the whole area. Um removing sand that was placed by the farmers to get closer to the groundwater level and get closer to that uh kind of holistic wetland ecosystem.
And the other is uh what we've approached here is more of a nuance approach with selective treatments. And that was because of uh the the maturity that we saw out on the site that is there now in terms of the ecosystems that have evolved there. Uh we did not
want to take a heavy-handed approach. I know this seems heavy-handed uh because there's a lot of work being done. Um, but we didn't want to kind of strip the entirety of the former cranberry bogs and restart. So, there is value to a lot of those wetlands that have evolved
there and we're hoping that these actions help to enhance that um rather than remove that. you know, Ellie, um, and Brad and Jack, as soon as the snow's gone, I'd be happy to give you a tour of the site because nothing really can replace the boots on the ground
experience for this project because it is it's quite significant, but you can really understand, you know, what our proposal is as well as what the benefits will be. >> Yeah, there's a lot. It's I mean, it's amazing effort. Um I know a lot of this is you know holistically but t talk to
me about how like specifically like in cell six and seven when you speak to um what's the sign what when it says fill existing for example fill existing stream to match adjacent wetland
>> elevation um typo but >> yeah definitely call me out on those. We got those. >> I'm sorry I just saw that be rude. Um how do how do you how do you do that? How do you do that? >> Yeah. So, >> and how long does that take for it to
reach that kind of equilibrium? You know what I mean? >> Sure. Yeah. I'm trying to go backwards on this. Um, >> it would be like sheet if you have sheets there like six. >> Which one do you want? >> Yeah. But I'll just Well, um >> I don't know. >> Just the uh overview of the the design
for the downstream end. Yeah. Go down >> up up. Sorry. projects. One of these. >> There we go. Yes. Right there. Uh so I think you're referring to um this ditch being filled in over here. >> Yeah. Yes.
>> So all for the most part all of this work is done by uh an excavator. So there'll be excavators of various sizes depending on the work that needs to be done. So an excavator will walk out on that earth and burm. >> Okay. And in the areas where we're
showing the berm being removed, it will dig that berm out and just push it into the ditch that's next to it. And so they'll put the earth into that ditch so that it matches the elevation of the
wetland that's right on this side. So, in the future um experience when you're walking across that boardwalk, it'll be like you're just walking across uh a wetland or salt marsh if as it evolves into a salt
marsh. Uh and it'll be a continuous salt marsh or wetland from this side across through that opening of the burm into this other space over here. And if there's not enough earth in this burm to fill that ditch, um we have those other
mounds of um upland over here that we're going to be uh lowered and that material will go into those ditches. So there'll be no material that is excavated and taken off site. All the excavated material will stay on site and you be used to fill ditches. So, okay, because
that was my concern on one of the impact on the uh I think it was again cells 537. I mean, you're moving a lot of dirt. Um >> specifically um like 30 Yeah. 3 over 3,000 yards of
fill. But that is all coming from what you're um dredging. It's >> coming from the excavation. not bringing in trucks of earth and correct have to ask what that is. It's all existing. >> Yeah, we really for these projects our
experience is that it's really expensive to bring material in and to get material offsite. So for the most part we try to have a balance of cut fill on the site. >> And this particular site we don't have anywhere else to put excavated material.
On many other projects, we have big sand pits where the farmer took sand out of the hillside and we can just fill those back in with excavated soil. But here, we have to have it balance um because we don't have those areas of fill. >> Yeah, I think that's really important,
the fact that you are um I I'm looking at this sheet 26 to 27 where you actually go you have a table >> specific to cells 5 through eight where >> there's no change, you know, to it it to the to the land if you will. And um so
yeah, I'm just trying to understand it and and I'm it's super impressive. Um again, that the survey is is just unbelievable. How long did it take you to do all that? >> Well, we've been at it since 20 uh 20 and at various stages with the field work and and designs.
>> Yeah. Okay. >> Well, thank I don't know if there weren't really questions, but just to understand the project. Thank you so much. Anybody >> else? Um, go ahead. No, why aren't you >> Well, I have a question if he doesn't want to talk,
>> but yeah. How does this merge with the um the um North Dennis Road project? Um it's interesting that this is done before that, you know. So, could could you just in a nutshell tell us about that? >> Sure. Absolutely. So, we'll start maybe
and then you can add that. Okay. Um so in terms of our designs for this, we are designing this project with the assumption that North Dennis Road will be opened up. And so the from the hydraulics and and evolution standpoint,
>> we're assuming that will happen. So this this will evolve from the site that it is now. If it's constructed a year before North Dennis Road or two years, whatever that might be, it it can function well and then it will evolve with the new condition once that's out.
Um, Ty Bond is the same designer for North Dennis Road as it is for Weir Road and the Woods Whole Group has done the modeling, the title modeling for both areas. So all of that information has meant for uh kind of a cohesive team of
the design team and the project partners as well. So there's information sharing there. >> So North Dennis Road is um really a critical element of this entire project. Um if you know Mil Pond which is beyond North End Road, it's the most impaired
body of water in all of Bass River and it requires a 73% reduction in nitrogen. Part of that problem is is a result of the six-foot culvert which doesn't allow uh sufficient volume of water to get up to Mil Pond. Uh it enhances residents
time is there for a long period of time. And uh so when we open this up to a 60 foot wide bridge, we will solve that that flow problem that uh has has really contributed to the the unhealthy nature of Mil Pond for for decades. I mean it's
so bad that the Mass Division of Marine Fisheries has designated it as a prohibited area for shellfishing and fishing. So this will be a real really important element as in terms of uh improving water quality in the bass overhead waters
and and also I think I've asked this question before but Crab Creek there where a lot of people use that for fishing and so on so forth that will be enhanced by the opening of west of um North Dennis Road. Yes, Paul, it will. And actually, the the Tyenbond design
has incorporated some uh significantly upgraded fishing areas as part of the bridge design. So, I think the community will be very happy when they they see the results of that. >> For sure. And last question for me. Um you talk about the uh boardwalks and so on. So, is there planning also about
vehicle parking along any of this area? Um because obviously it would be a tremendous recreation area or walking area for the town. So >> yeah, great great question. >> They got to park their car someplace. >> Good question. Um and I think that
element is still in discussion with the town. It's all town owned property there. Uh we have an area of access and staging uh adjacent to Weir Road right now. Uh that's a possibility for a location for a few parking spots. I think we are we don't want to open it up
to a large parking space. Uh we want to respect the the neighborhood and and their use, passive recreational use there. Uh but also give that opportunity for a few vehicles to be able to park safely and and be off the road.
>> Perfect. Okay. Thank you. >> Uh yeah, first thing is what happened to the pesticides >> that was part of the farming? >> Yeah. Have you monitored that? Yes, we did do some sampling. This was
one of the first uh field efforts back in 2021, I believe. Um and uh I can send you I can't remember if we included the results of those uh that sampling >> saw nowhere. >> What's that? >> Would those be the boring logs?
>> Um >> no, the boring logs were for the weir road crossing. Uh but we we took uh sediment samples of the pete and sand uh in the various bogs there. Um and I think it was pretty minimal uh of what we observed there. Broadly for these
projects, we've been sampling them since that Eel River project back in 2007. And more recently, uh our efforts with D conversations have happened between agencies at the state. They want to make
sure all the material stays on site. Um, if there is material that is contaminated with pesticides, DDT, dirine, whatever it might be, it gets taken off site, that becomes problematic. Um, but if they see it
being reused on site, they see it as not making things any worse there. It's there. It's been there for a long time. Um, and that's been the permitting process uh for many other projects on this site. Uh, I have to
look back at the results, but I don't think we had um heavy instances of those contaminants like we have on on some others. Yeah, I think that we'll need to see some of the results and whatever D says if you're going to put it back like
you're putting sand back in there and if you're using it, it could accumulate, you know, touch areas that that pesticide wasn't there before. So anything that you dump back in is going to need treat is going to need uh some
kind of measurement of pesticide levels for its reuse. I would be my opinion. So what about costs? This is an area that uh in a sense you're sort of taking
advantage of the areas like you said that have been there a long time, 50 years and they've grown back and uh some people might think why aren't you really treating those
other areas for something a little better? Is cost enter into that picture? uh cost has been a factor all along uh in considering all of our treatments. I think um we from the early stages of
design uh trying to develop uh concept cost estimates to help guide the process both uh with time and bond as well from the structures and ourselves from the ecological restoration. Uh so yes, cost is is certainly a factor with all of
this uh as it is with as our you know sea level rise and resiliency and all the other elements. >> But I'm saying did you actually make a decision based on just costs and not what you really wanted biologically or ecologically for the area to turn into?
>> I would say for the most part we were driven by the e ecological components here. Um we I think as most of the projects we come up with an initial design that we think uh benefits the
most and if that cost seems problematic to the project partners then we adjust from there. But uh Rick and the the project partners have done an amazing job of raising state and federal funds for this project to to get us to this point. I think we have all the funds in
hand. Is that right? We do and we have approximately $10.6 million in hand. >> Um so the the decisions to not remove sand across the entirety of the cranberry bogs that was more of uh the
intent to retain some of the function of the existing ecosystems out there. >> What about fill? You've uh there are other ways of getting ditches filled in. Mhm. >> Have you cons what other ways did you
consider and why not or you know rather than whether you throwing vegetation back in things like that other alternative methods? >> Yeah, I'd be curious to hear your thoughts on what those other methods might be. Um are you thinking of uh
using large wood that might be taken down or >> That's your not me. >> Yeah. So, so from what we've done in the past, um the the ditches uh is a location where
the wetlands are being drained. >> And our goal is to stop that drainage. Uh because if we can uh slow down that drainage pattern, then we can restore the hydraologic routines of those wetlands and restore
the wetland functionality. Uh so for both the lateral ditches and the perimeter ditches, filling those ditches with uh soil, preferably a mix of organic and sandy soil. Uh that helps to slow that flow
pattern down. If we were to fill it with vegetation or other refues, there's too many void spaces in there that water would still be able to flow through. Uh, and so that's been what's worked in the past is is grading the edges of the bogs
by uh filling those ditches and creating a more gentle slope off of the edge to try to mimic what may have been there in the past also and a more gentle slope into the bogs. >> Well, then continuing from that, you've got your flow hydro models
>> quite extensive. How are you going to take those with you out into the field when you're actually doing the work? How are you going to you think what type of people are you going to have there when you go into a stretch and you say, "Well, let's go down five
inches or let's you know, fill in this much and how the model is going to help you right then." >> Yeah. So the the model doesn't uh play too much of a role when we're in construction unless there's a change in the uh site conditions or a change in
design. That's when we might go back to the model and take a look at that to see what the impacts might be. But when we're in construction, we've typically worked with some pretty incredible contractors that uh have been doing this kind of work for a long time and they're
used to working in wetlands and we are there with them looking at the plans together um looking at the site conditions. They're digging a hole. We're looking at the profiles. So we're looking at that together to see if it's matching the
design intent uh and and uh achieving the design goals. >> So how about regulators? Are you going to invite regulators along? >> Absolutely. Uh they are there commonly during this process. Uh commission
members uh D army corps they're always invited and welcome. Do you hold uh status meetings or decision point meetings? >> Weekly meetings for construction. Uh and those are good times for anybody to
visit. But uh typically the order of conditions and the conditions that D and the Army Corps put in their permits say that they will visit the site anytime they want. Um and that's understood by us as well. We typically have periods throughout the project where uh maybe
halfway through where we might have a an open invitation, you know, remind them about the project and invite them down to see I would like to see a half a page page, two pages on that process and how you sure >> get people together, make decisions,
um all of a sudden realize whatever reason that you know it's not really what you thought it was >> and having uh scheduled meetings or at least say okay here we can schedule a
meeting but maybe we don't need it that kind of thing. Absolutely. Uh in the recent one and uh Coldbrook and Haritch, the commission also asked for I believe quarterly updates at a hearing. Uh so we presented updates to them uh throughout
the year during that time. So that can be conditioned as well if that's a preference, but I can certainly put together uh some thoughts on the meeting schedule. >> Yeah, that'd be great. Um well, that's about it for the moment. I hope to be a part of the going along and
seeing it progress. I think you guys, Rick is proud. I know he's like a father on this and rightfully so. I think that the community though has been behind him and I talked to people on the association and they really believe in this a lot.
So, it's great to see. >> Thank you, Jack. >> So, I I've been out there I think three times. Very impressed obviously with what's going on and happy it's moving ahead. Um I do have a couple of
questions. It's been answered already. Um storm water report. Do you think is is one needed and if so is it going to get done? >> Yeah. So we've been discussing this. I think at this point I am happy to we
have a little bit of a laundry list going of things that usually the contractor would prepare and submit later. Um, and I think instead of a full-fledged storm water report, we would just be fine with calculations being submitted along with all the other submissions like the dewatering plan and
PL planting plan later on. That's what I would suggest because they've done they're also subject to a SWIP and other storm water requirements that will need to be done at some point. So, those calculations will be in progress. the um in in our experience with these
projects, the the SWIP is always required for the EPA construction general permit. Um but we haven't needed a storm water plan um because we're not building impervious surfaces out there. Uh and for the weir road as well,
they're not adding they're not extending the size of that area or anything like that. >> Um are you going to have a trail map at some point? Yeah, friends of bass server is really committed to um their volunteers
maintaining those trails as well as uh signage is is usually a part of uh some of our some of the grants. So there will be some signage constructed as well, but will be part of that from from the very beginning. >> Britney, are you okay with the uh design
of the bridges? >> Um I think they're still in progress um at this point. So the designs that you see in your plan set may change slightly by the time of construction. >> Um and personally I would have no
problem if they become administratively approved rather than have to come back here for that. it. So it depends on we have all these items that um was the same with the baby vox project, the dewatering plan, spill prevention plan, planting, invasive management um to be
submitted later and at for those you would like you wanted to review them at a hearing if you you can do the same for them. Um that would make sense. So you can review any design changes to the bridges at the hearing then. >> And I agree with my other commissioners
here. You guys have Rick, I been watching you do this since I've known you, so it's very impressive. I know the work you've been putting in on this. >> Go ahead. >> I just have a followup. You mentioned um on the bridges um you you in your presentation, I didn't see where, but
could we have a list of the other installations that are similar? Um that would be helpful to just look at those and >> um >> yeah, you had it in your proposal. And then um when you speak of dewatering um
there there was that you have the like a narrative here and I didn't know if the narrative if the details superseded the narrative because in the narrative you have some language that that kind of is a little bit loose where you say the proposed work has the potential to
mobilize sediment through movement of heavy equipment across the wetlands. contractor will likely divert flowing water through existing channels and ditches away from the active work area to limit sediment movement and turbidity. Pumps may be needed to move water out of a work area, etc., etc. Is
that what is triggering this question for a deatering plan? >> I think so. The coffer dam plan is kind of solid set in stone. They have a coffer dam plan. Um I think it's for the abutments for weird road. Is that correct? Road. Yeah, that the dewatering plan. So they have like a general
guideline and then the details would be submitted later. >> Okay. >> So it wouldn't it does supersede but it falls into everything that would already be approved. >> Okay. >> Just be more detailed. >> Yeah. And and the the dewatering for the road is is really important that they're working in dry conditions there. Sure.
>> Um for the rest of it uh as the sort of the more general comments there. The farm ditches have been helpful in the past to divert water flow in there while the contractors are working on the bogs elsewhere and then re um inserting the
the the water into the new channel. So um that'll be part of that work plan. The contractor will develop a work plan. >> Yeah. >> That we will review, partners will review um and that's where we'll see all right, how are you actually doing this
step by step. Yeah, that's super that's super important. Yeah, it's like let my people go. You have the water flowing. It's like >> Yep. >> Now what? >> It's complicated. Yeah. >> Yeah. It's great. Thank you. >> Yeah. One would like to see a special condition for quarterly reports. I think
that'll be >> you like hearing >> anything to add Britney hasn't been said. Um we went back I submitted some questions that were mostly answered by Interflu and um some by Stimson. Um just
my primary concern at this point really proud of the work that's been done. Really looking forward to a big ecological restoration plan happening in Yarmouth. Um, but since we are putting in infrastructure and we want to keep coastal resilience in mind, I think those crossings and boardwalks really
have to consider the future floods that they're going to sustain and be maintained through and have the town staff be able to perform regular easy maintenance on them. Um, so other other than other than that, I'm very happy with the plan so far. Um, I definitely
are mo most interested in the invasive plant management plan and planting plans. Um, so those if they're available before all of the other more construction items, um, would definitely like to see those. I loved the incorporation of different sizes of Atlantic white cedar in different places, but I understand that's just a
recommendation. So, I'd love to see that actually be in the planting plans if possible. >> Um, >> and our final designs will um, that'll be sort of that next step of really diving into the numbers and species and sizes. >> Okay, perfect. That's all. Thank you. We
are still so we're waiting for the D number and DMF comment. I know that they've >> um put in a comment or two in previous items of permitting, but they still do need to respond to us as well. One thing I think may have missed, but
um future flows coming up from the ocean and reaction as you know things fall apart, get eroded, whatever. Are you uh do you have a sort of approach that you're taking to keep an
eye on things over the next 5 10 years? Yeah, >> this is not part of the uh application this evening, but the North Dennis Road um cover replacement, the town of Yarmouth has made a determination that they're going to be raising that road by 4 feet. So, that consideration carries
over all the way through Mil Pond into the wetlands areas. So, it it is on the table is and very much aware of it as part of the project. I would say um typically for the permits that we receive for these projects, there is a requirement for some sort of monitoring
for usually up to three years. Um, and I would imagine uh Rick and and folks will be monitoring beyond that on a on a less formal basis, but there will be that requirement um uh to have that monitoring for a period of time to
evaluate the changes in vegetation and site conditions >> and a few people up in that area that live there that may see it come up in their yards. Yeah, it's a good it's a good question just in terms of like what what changes they'll see out there. Um
it's mostly freshwater vegetation right now. As things evolve, we'll start to see more and more saltwater vegetation along the edges of the channel that will begin to expand. Uh eventually um some of the freshwater trees and saplings
that are there now will evolve over time. Um, and we'll we'll start to see that as we have elsewhere. >> Okay. Thanks. >> I just have one one more. I'm sorry. One more question. Um, will department the
natural resources department be the main uh department uh to oversee this um area? >> Yes, I was with them today and we had a conversation about that. >> Thank you. >> Anybody in the audience have any questions or comments? Anybody
online raise your hand? I don't see anybody. So, we need to just vote a continuence. >> Yes. >> And I will also um draft all the special conditions for your review before the
next hearing so that can be quickly issued after that. >> Great. >> So, date >> 19 February 19th >> 19. I think >> enough time
>> for what? We didn't ask for any revisions. >> No revisions. No revisions needed. So, it's just a D number. >> Yeah, a D number and DMF comment >> um and to review any >> special conditions.
>> Okay. So, do I hear a motion wait uh to continue to the 19th? >> Yeah. >> Second. >> A second. >> Second. Okay. All in favor? >> Anybody opposed? >> Thank you very much everyone.
>> Thank you for your time. >> I'm serious about that tour. I'd be happy to give that to you. >> Too much time. >> I apologize that I >> Yeah, you skipped one. I was wondering what happened to that. >> Yeah, I was really I missed that.
>> Well, by the time I noticed they were already set up reason was is that Thank you. Kind of buried in there. I >> think I saw Dennis Road and I'm saying, "Oh, that must be." >> So I apologize. Um
>> Christian. So the next one is seven uh sorry SE 832513 Christian Hayes Cape Cod Bay off Lone Creek >> Lone Tree Creek proposed. >> Yeah. >> Aquaculture farm and land under the
ocean land containing shellfish. title flats >> and NHSP habitat. I apologize for but you've probably learned a lot. >> Yes, it was very interesting listening to all that. >> That's my excuse anyway.
>> No worries. >> Okay. Do you want to tell us a little bit about your proposal project? >> Yes. Um I propose a 2.7 acre um aquaculture farm. Um, I've gone through
the process with division marine fisheries, MISA, Meepa, Army Corps, and I'm sure there's several of them have them on file. Um, all with approval
and um, basically I'm just trying to get final approval from, you know, going through the proper steps and starting this project out. There are two existing grants out there. uh John Reeds and uh Chris George. So, I'm kind of like set
right up in the middle of them and um like to get going on that and and um just uh waiting for some approval. >> Any questions about >> Yeah. Could you just put up the map
again of where this is going to be? >> Yes. So, here's the um >> um >> map. This is Lone Tree Creek up here. Here's the site, Barnespa Harbor. This is an aerial image of you can kind of see sort of everything that's in place
for the two existing grants and his is proposed right in between them. Okay. That doesn't in any way restrict any kind of access by the general public to um boating or even just walking out on
the on the flats or whatever, does it? >> No. And they are all the uh grants are marked with um buoys, the poly balls. >> Um there are a few boats mored in that mill creek, >> but it's very difficult for them to
navigate because of the title issue in there. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you. >> And this was already approved by the waterways and shellfish advisory board. >> Yeah. I I just it's just such a
incredible area. You just want to make sure that it's I know it'll be taken care of very very well. Yeah. >> Yes. Have you seen the uh one the ones in Barnstable Harbor? All those guys out there and their oyster grants. >> Yeah, I guess in the middle of the harbor.
>> We don't really Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I oyster down there, but you know, so um I'm not exactly sure where they're laid out from Scutter Lane. That area >> straight out due north. Yeah. >> Yeah. Okay. Y it's great to see >> it's very low profile. I'm all completely underwater. I don't have any
surface um floats for oysters to grow. So if there at high tide there will be areas that boats can float in and out of that area. But um for the most part um once you hit half tide or so bigger boats and and even me Yeah. You're not
going to be getting in and out of there. >> Right. Right. Okay. Thank you. else. Um, I kind of got lost in the in the documents on um I there seems to be like a conflict with
the department the division of fisheries and wildlife and and the um commonwealth of Massachusetts and um the MEPA aquaculture filing is I guess the the basic question is are we there's a
statement here says as noted the MEPA agriculture filing incorrectly ly indicates it's kind of like a double negative incorrectly indicates that the project is not located within map species habitat. >> Yeah, they're just saying >> what does that say?
>> He triggered natural heritage um or Massachusetts Endangered Species Act review and he did complete it. It just wasn't done at the time of the MEPO letter. So, they're saying he said it's not it doesn't apply, but it does apply. And he then did all of the correct
things after that in order to remedy that. >> Terrible. >> All right. So, we're good. I mean, the letter the letter from the Division of Fishery and Wildlife is is >> wildlife. All is well here. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yes. It was very confusing to go through
all of it. I'll tell you. >> Only imagine. Yeah. Yeah. Just take care of those piping clovers. Thank you. >> No, we'll just um echo the three special conditions already listed in all of your
approvals about the wijon grass 25 ft buffer, the vertical lines kept under tension and the entanglement. So those will you'll see those as special conditions, but there won't be anything else. >> Anybody um in the audience? >> I have a question actually. Um
the this is more for Britney. Um, but what address would this be recorded to since it's in the bay? >> In the past, I don't believe that um we have recorded aquaculture projects. Um, I can check.
Um, so it is under his home address in all of our files. Um, but it would not make sense to record it on his deed at his home. So I don't believe that aquaculture grants get recorded at the registry. I can confirm with D on that.
>> It I the reason I ask is it kind of limits how we can enforce this in the future if there's no >> it's not tied to any >> parcel deed. That's a great question. Um I did check the other two that we have
active and they are not recorded. Um, so if that is an incorrect force of action, we can check with D on how to proceed, but we don't have so many of them as to build a good group of past proceedings.
>> I was more curious on that. >> So since it is also he had to go through Army Corps and MEPA so and the federal fish and wildlife, it's also under federal enforcement. >> Yeah. So he has many levels of of special conditions pretty much um to
comply with. But I hear you. >> Yeah. Also don't know how you got an Army Corps permit without a order of conditions, but that that's doesn't matter. >> It's I mean I guess it's not um >> it's it's a coordinate thing and also
navigation because they deal with a lot of navigation. >> Yeah. I've applied for a lot of Army Corps permits and they normally ask for that order of condition. So, it it doesn't matter. I'm just more curious on how that process went. But >> yeah, he did they didn't the Army Corps
letter doesn't even mention um I think it just doesn't it says it doesn't you still have to obtain other federal, state, and local authorizations that are required. Doesn't say you need them before. So, >> when did you That one was one of the
earlier ones. Oh, no. this fall. >> Okay, I'll ask once more just to make sure I didn't miss anything. Anybody else out there want to say anything? How about online? Raise your hand. >> So, do I hear a um
motion to accept move? Paul second. >> I'll second. >> All in favor? >> I opposed. >> Great. Congratulations. Thank you. >> Do you want to pick this up next week?
>> Sure. >> Okay. We'll email you when it's ready. >> Remember to sign. >> Oh, right. >> Thank you. >> Oh, do you have a pen? This one's purple. I don't know why I'm doing these colors.
>> Okay. Thank you. Uh, next is SE 832514 Crawford land management for Scott Peterson 10 and 20 Susan Road proposed bank stabilization using core fiber roles and invasive tree removal and coastal bank and land subject to coastal
storm flooding. Introduce yourself and uh go from there. >> All right. Uh, good evening, Nick Crawford from Crawford Land Management. Um what we've have have here is a coastal stabilization project where we're using bioengineering to stabilize
the coastal bank. Um currently the site is um predominantly lawn with um invasive trees along the top of the bank that are in various degrees of um being
undermined and um I believe some have come down. Um we are proposing to stabilize the area with a cooer fiber roll array that's um four logs high. Um,
we are also proposing at the top of the array to uh remove lawn and install a vegetative native vegetative buffer strip um to the top of the coastal bank to help um with both stability and
runoff from the lawn. Um, as part of this, we'd be nourishing over the koyer fiber rolls, um, and planting with native species as part of the replanting plan. Um, Britney, we saw your
questions. Um, so, as far as, you know, a uh, as far as adding additional species to the to the array, we're um, that's totally fine. We can definitely make some revisions and do that. I saw
the letter that you had attached from a >> previous project >> circuit writer. Yeah. >> Um so we can definitely make that adjustment. Um we're okay. You know, we want to keep the installation covered with sacrificial sand. So um nourishment
um isn't an issue. Um and we're also okay with uh eliminating phase two of the project. Um that was I had made the recommendation that um if we're going to get permission
uh to get permission for all of it at once. That way if they wanted to construct it later they could without coming back. But um they're not super interested in doing the second phase anyway. So I don't think that's an issue. Um as far as how the koer array
will the ends of the koer array will be installed. Um the one end butts up to the stone groin that's there at the moment um or would butt up to that. So we would dye the installation integrade behind that stone behind that stone
groin. And then on the um just make sure that's north. Yeah. On the on the southern end um we would taper it down from four logs to one and diet and degrade into the into the eroding
coastal bank. Um, trying to think. I think I think those were most of your questions. Um, and that that that's about it. So, if anyone has any questions, I'm happy to answer
them. >> Anybody have questions? >> Could you speak to the rate of erosion at this site? Um I can find that out. I can find out what the um calculated annual rate of erosion
is based on the length of the bank >> and the height of it um to get the estimated sacrificial nourishment that would need to be placed over it. I don't know the actual um rate of erosion. I I do know that if
it's hard to see in like aerial photos on Google Earth and stuff like that because of the um the locust tree cover. >> Um >> so actually I was the the reason I asked that is because through the aerials um
it the site seems fairly stable. um it looked like there was an erosion event in like 2017 2018 time frame but since then it hasn't really eroded significantly more than that at least not from the aerials.
>> Yeah. So I was kind of wondering what the the purpose of this >> I mean I think would be >> yeah so I think with um with most areas with the exception of like the the coast along the Atlantic um erosion doesn't
typically happen one foot per year. Usually things kind of stay stagnant and then all of the sudden you'll get whacked with a storm and lose three or four feet all at once. And I think that's what you see in that aerial image. Um, I think there's been perpetual undermining of the coastal
bank um for quite a period of time as you can see in some of the photos that Britney had. I think you could stick a tape measure four or five feet under those locust trees. Um and I do think that you know part of this project is
also aimed at alleviating um alleviating some of the uh negative impacts of the stone groin there. >> Thank you. Um, that was actually going to be my next question was, um, I didn't
see in the alternatives analysis, um, the potential for removing that stone groin and addressing the cause of potentially a lot of this erosion. >> Yeah, I well, right on the other side of the stone groin, there's also a
bulkhead. Um, I can't predict what would happen if the groin was removed, but I think that the negative impacts from the bulkhead would be similar to the groin. It might occur further down or closer um to the
bulkhead itself. I'm I'm not quite sure. Um but which is why we're proposing um you know a uh bio-engineered kind of vegetated solution whereas um you know we we're not looking to extend the
bulkhead or make any more um art solutions further down to exacerbate the problem. >> Okay. I was just wondering if this application has proven successful before, has been utilized elsewhere, because if it works, that's a great
thing. >> Yeah, it certainly works. Um, it definitely doesn't work forever. It is I, you know, it's like a semi semi-permanent solution. They have the ability to last up to 15 plus years with proper maintenance, mostly keeping them
covered and vegetated. Um but it certainly isn't forever. So um they do prove effective. Um we've installed thousands and thousands of linear feet
rolls along the Bass River. Um also um both in kind of river systems um protected like estuarian systems like Green Pond and Falmouth um and even
closer to open ocean conditions on the sound in Chadam >> and they've lasted up to I know that we removed an installation that was previously done I think in 2008 um and we replaced that in Chadam on
Nant Nucket Sound uh two years ago, so it lasted 17 years. >> So, they do have the ability to last. Um, one of the biggest contributors to them not lasting their full potential is the UV degradation from the sun,
>> which is why you want to keep it covered. >> And then I was wondering who named a tree of heaven or an invasive species. >> Yeah, >> joke. >> I do not know. Tree of heaven.
>> Um, how is this parcel used? >> Um, it's a good question. I'm not a 100% sure. I know that I think they use this area a little bit um during the summertime. Uh, I think they have a small like sunfish that they launch from
this area at points during the summer. Um, but it's, you know, kind of passive. >> Uh, >> so it's visual. >> What's visual? >> I mean, is that the use of it is uh the visual scenery?
>> I mean, I suppose, you know, obviously it's a nice view. Um, you know, I know that they I don't know the particulars of how they utilize the whole property. >> Well, I'm just trying to feel get a feel for why they want it in the first place. Mhm. >> Uh I think that
um so you're not really talking about if it's not eroding, it's probably not providing anything to some other shoreline. Um I mean it it is eroding. It is a sediment source
um over time and that's what the sacrificial nourishment and required nourishment would um supplant. But uh you know there's there's s there's salt marsh adjacent to the kind of bare spot
of beach on either either side of it. So I think that the sacrificial nourishment will um also help over time slowly raising the elevation of the salt marsh nourishing over it. >> Okay. You said it's there's salt marsh on either side of it. So are you
agreeing that this is salt marsh down here? >> No. I think I think there was one more picture. There's just two patches of salt marsh >> near inside the groins. >> Um, no fur further down like where the inst There it is.
>> So, the end of the installation is you can see the one locust tree that kind of wise out at the bottom. That's more or less where the end of the installation is. So, there's salt marsh to both the right and left of um
the installation. >> Okay. That's not shown on your plan. >> Um, okay. >> If you could add those in. >> Yep. >> Especially, >> yeah, we can we can make the revisions to um revise the species, add a a note
about um an annual nourishment trigger. Um and uh >> the area that I what led to my comment >> Mhm. >> which is to the ultimately up to the commission to recommend eliminating
phase two is that this bottom end I cannot identify salt marsh from an aerial image but it looks like there could be >> there definitely is down at this point down here. Yeah. So that also needs to be reflected on the existing conditions plan cuz when we approve an order we're
approving everything all the resource area boundaries on the plan. >> Um so who's your surveyor? So Dan will need to capture those both >> these salt marshes here and the one at the bottom even though >> work is not proposed directly on it.
>> Okay. Um, since it's there, >> do you want the just the landward extent or the whole polygon shape of the salt marsh? >> We could we can >> Yeah, because you're not going to be able to go out there, right?
>> Oh, right. Yeah, exactly. So, I think um would you be okay with um >> you mean just the >> locating them with aerial photography and making a note that that that resource delineation wasn't confirmed in
the field? >> That would be up to the commission. I'm not sure. >> Well, could they if once they could do it in the field, they could could they make the adjustment if there is one? make the adjustment. >> In other words, if you miss field
located on a revised >> uh let me talk to down cape and um see what they have because I know that we obviously we don't have the property all the way to the peninsula shown because it wasn't part of the project. >> So there might be more information on
the surveyor's existing conditions plan rather than the layers that we brought through on the restoration plan. So I can I can double check that. >> Okay, that would be great. Um even if you want to, you know, not show >> the over here, cut that off and just
show the um extent that is near your proposed project, >> that would be excellent. >> Yeah, I do know that we um we did get actual spot elevations that you can see on there where the X's X says >> X 1.0. We wanted to get spot grades so
that we could make sure that the um the array was located in the right spot and is accurate for purposes of constructing it. So I I'll double check what's on the uh the survey existing conditions plan rather than the
restoration plan. >> Okay. Have you implemented projects like this for coastal bank stabilization when there's salt marsh footing it? >> Yes. And it doesn't have a negative impact. All the nourishment doesn't have a negative impact on the salt marsh. >> Not at all. >> Anybody else?
Anything else from you, Britney? >> Um, you've answered all my questions. I would just echo the concerns for um a coastal bank stabilization project on a parcel that is undeveloped. That's kind of what I was alluding to as well. Um, and taking into consideration
the the groin. Um, because to me it seems like the groin is maybe the cause of a lot of this erosion over time. Um so providing some justification of it's not the groin or
>> right >> um the wave energy is coming from a different direction or something like that. Um just to to justify why this uh >> project's more important to stabilize the dune than to just let it continue to erode
naturally knowing it's undeveloped. Anybody in the audience online? Raise your hand. >> Anybody still there? >> So, >> I mean, I would recommend a continuence
for review of revised plans. >> Yeah. >> Um, >> and when would be the best? I'd say I think the earliest that the project would be implemented anyway was going to be the fall. >> Okay. >> So, I'd say let's continue for one month
to the 5th and that'll give us time to get in touch with Down Cape and um also talk with the client and figure out um answers to your questions, the salt marsh, and make the uh the revisions. >> Okay. Do I hear such a motion? >> What date is that?
>> March 5th. >> March 5th. >> I'll move that we continue this to March 5th, 2026. >> Second from anybody >> second in favor >> I >> thanks >> have a good one
>> Mr. Mr. Chairman >> did I um request a five minute um recess >> must be hearing my my own head. Yes. >> Okay. We're in a fivem minute recess. will resume at 700. Um
>> 706 I can't see what that >> 76 78 >> 708 >> You want to go first? >> There's one upstairs too. >> All these old guys on the committee.
>> So is that is the objective of the corine to prevent erosion and initial >> Oh, we're live. Yeah. Sorry. Um, I We don't have 22 Driftwood Lane on our >> No. Um, they did not complete their
application. >> Okay. >> So, it was moved to the We had it on the draft agenda, but they didn't submit what we needed in time to make it. >> Thank you. >> Like, am I missing something?
>> Keep that. Lord. for the month renovating. Yeah. >> No, no, just the counter space filling in, you know, an opening. So that would be crazier than usual
adding another oven for the breakfast sandwiches. So guess that's the objective. Yeah. >> To make sandwiches faster. >> Yeah, I was actually Yeah, it would be make my life harder to make more sandwiches. That's what I do in the
back. bread. >> No, it used to be that we use that oven. >> I can only imagine that oven is the real deal. >> We just use that oven now for, you know, just baking.
My cousin is an avid skier and they put her on the trail. There's a photo of her on the new posted trail maps for Winter Park 2026. You can see her face. She's just wears very bright ski attire, so she was good
for the trail. We're going skiing this weekend. >> It's going to be very cold before the wind. >> Yeah, >> it's not me, the young people. Britney,
>> we are back in session. It is 709. Is that what it says? Right. So, we have at SE832510 Cape Town Cape Engineering for Angela Kazeni. I hope I pronounced that right. 29 Lewis Bay Boulevard unit 6.
proposed relocation elevation of a dwelling with additions in land subject to co and the buffer zones to a coastal bank in and beach. Good evening. For the record, Danny Gonzalez, professional engineer with Down Cape Engineering here
on behalf of the client Angela Cassenzi and her project at 29 Lewis Bay Boulevard. Um, this dwelling is a part of the Yarmouth Shores Condo Association. You may remember recently. We're just here for a reetment wall
repair project that has been approved and um believe is going to be ongoing shortly in the next few months. Um so as they're working towards that uh with coastal resilience in mind, our client has decided, as you can see by the
picture, they are very close to the top of that wall. uh they would like to pick up and move this dwelling to uh the north and slightly east uh from where it is now as well as lift it from where it
is and make sure that it is flood zone compliant. So we are moving further away from the resource areas uh rather large reduction in hardscape within that 50-ft buffer and within that 35 foot buffer. Um,
as part of that, they are going to rework some of the structure, but most of that structure is going to remain intact. They're just kind of improving efficiency in in living areas and how everything will work there. We feel it's an improvement over current conditions
and would be happy to answer any questions that you have. >> Just trying to get this straight in my mind. They're moving it back and over towards >> Yeah, left, I guess you'd call it. It's tough to see, but it is grayed out in
the background of that colored plan. But, um, that is yeah, kind of the existing dwelling there. Just to the right of that patio area is kind of that back corner of where the house is now. So, it's mostly going north towards the
driveway. It is moving a few feet to the right uh to the east side of that property. Um, >> so you're seeing a reduction or an increase from 12 feet to 29 ft. Is that correct?
>> Yes. With the main structure. >> Anybody have any questions or comments? >> Yeah. Is this a raise and replace or is how are you >> It's not. Yeah, they're gonna uh it's very kind of interesting process. They basically jack up the house, put uh
rollers on it, get rid of the old foundation, and they can slide it, build a new foundation under it, and then they drop it right back onto that new foundation. So, uh they are doing some reworking of the structure, but the majority of that existing structure is going to remain as it is now.
>> So, it's not going on still, this going right on the foundation. >> Correct. Yeah, we're not in a velocity zone with uh the structure. We are in a zone. So, we will meet the new building codes for the height and the first floor and all the utilities for that.
>> But the first floor elevation in the old >> Oops. In the old one was >> we're going up about 5T. >> 5T. But you're not putting still. What's going to be under the house? The new house. >> It'll probably be a slab at grade with a concrete foundation with flood vents all
around it. >> So, it still be a four foot crawl space type thing. Um I thank you. I saw in the um narrative that there's no mitigation uh required. Um was the original house
um did it come under our review for mitigation? I >> this would have been constructed I think in the 20s when this building was there. So >> I guess the reason I'm ask asking is I don't understand why we're not looking at the new location in and of itself uh
for for for mitigation because of the impact to you know within the 3550 foot buffer. Um I just have a hard time not looking at that as requiring mitigation um
or decreasing hardscape within those sensitive areas. So that's why no mitigation is proposed. you guys have a factor in your regulations of yeah, >> you know, 3 to one, especially in those sensitive areas where we're moving it away from those zones. >> We feel like that's an improvement.
>> Um, I'd asked Britney this because there was some conflict in the description on the on the relocate on the moving that's a big deal and that is a lot of impact to the subsurface the what you describe as as moving a a structure like that. It
is. So, I I I think we need to see what um I know there's just a few companies that do that and if we could see what that uh what they plan on doing, how and the logistics of that because of the impact to the subsurface it, you know, are they drilling? Are
they >> No, no drilling. Like I said, they jack this thing way up in the air so they can work under it, >> and that's when they'll have typical machinery in there to, you know, dig out a new foundation, build it, and then they can place this thing right back on
that new foundation. >> But I'd like to see how they're going to restore the the subsurface after that's all done. >> Where the oldation used to be, you mean? >> Yeah, >> it'll be removed and filled with sand, I imagine.
>> Could we have something on that or some >> will you be bringing in fill? >> I don't think we'll need to bring in fill because the new foundation we're not digging a hole, you know, it's not groundwater is not super deep here. So, there's not a big hole under this
foundation now. So, will there be a little bit of film? Maybe. But it's not going to be a significant amount. It's just going to match the existing grade around that area now. Excuse me. Which which is I've got it here, but
which is the line for 50 foot for the new building. >> 50 foot, it cuts about halfway through there. >> Second line. >> Yep. >> So the 100 foot and beyond. >> Yeah. >> Up there. Yep. >> So essentially, you still have
some of the building in the 35 >> a little bit. Yep. So essentially uh and what's your runoff? How are you going to handle runoff off the new building? >> There are dry wells shown with drywalls shown on that plan. >> Okay. So this is not an unusual thing. I
mean I I' I've seen where they've moved buildings. Um Bradford asked if this was a raise and replace, but it's really an RIS and relocate. Right. Correct. So, um that's that's somewhat common around here, I would think. And what is the um
the foundation under the existing building is a slab. >> I would have to confirm that they may have a shallow crawl space, but >> Okay. I just was wondering what they'd be lifting up um from from the current location to the new location. And so,
>> yeah, I I believe it's a mix of concrete and rock. you know, it's an older house, so it's not like a newer poured concrete foundation. >> Yeah. And I think it's it's an interesting uh solution to the problem of being too close to the shore, I guess, you know. So,
>> yeah, >> sounds sounds interesting. Thank you. >> Thanks. >> Questioning the patio being only what, two, it's 12, sorry, 12 and a half feet away and within the 35 foot buffer.
So there is a patio there. Now we are removing or you're getting further away from what is existing. >> Is this the patio um that was un >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I remember that. Yeah.
>> Yeah. There is a section of unpermitted patio that was part of the old order conditions. They're actually up there today. I think started removing that. So >> remember that. >> Yeah. Um, so I'd like to see the patio
eliminated. How other people feel it's in the velocity zone, but it's in the 35 foot buffer. >> Well, again, we are having a significant reduction in hardcape within that 35 foot buffer. Even with that patio there, they have an impatio there now, which
they enjoy and they'd like to continue to enjoy. we're getting further away from the resource areas and um that's our reasoning for it. >> Um just to go off of uh the mitigation I
believe for that previous permit for the um >> reetment >> revent Thank you. Um I think that one had a 10 foot buffer. Is that correct? >> Yeah, that's right. >> Okay.
>> So, >> none of this work will impact that. That will still be >> Yeah. >> I I just wanted to bring that back to the the rest of our commission to just remember that there will be at least a 10 foot strip in that
>> between the patio and the revenant. >> Yeah. Yeah, it's on there. Yeah. Anybody else? >> I know your turn. I was just thinking whether I wanted to say anything else first. Go ahead.
>> Um I think I sent you my questions ahead of time. Did I remember? Um I have concerns about the work limit line. There's an area of Oops, that's not the right spot. Um there is an area of undisturbed vegetation that adds to the buffer on this side. Um, and you're
showing the work limit line go through it. And I'm wondering, so it's this dotted line, existing landscaped area, and I think that should remain protected as it's a naturalized area in the 35 foot buffer. Um, and details about these landscape areas that continue on to the
proposed conditions, but I imagined they're going to be heavily impacted by the work >> and what would the proposed conditions be if you're impacting those existing vegetated areas because so they should be replicated elsewhere. Um, I understand this one, this one on the side, it looks like a hedge of
non-native variety, but this one perhaps may have some benefit. Um, and it should be replicated if it's being negatively impact from the construction. It does look like this might be rather close to the edge. So, you need access fully around to the existing house. Um,
let's see if I can pull up this >> to the extent possible. I'd like to see that work limit line protecting the vegetation on the south side. That's not it. >> No, I don't know what went um this here.
So, that's all naturalized vegetation. Um if some has to be impacted, it should be restored or replicated to add on to that 10-ft buffer. And if there's going to be any sort of landscape foundation plantings, we do need to review those to ensure they're native species within the 100 foot
buffer. Um, and I also am slightly confused on your cover table. Um, it should reflect the template that we provide in our plan requirements, but with additions, the house is showing a decrease in coverage, and I don't
imagine how that's possible if we're adding additions. Um, so I would just re um request that you take a second look at the coverage table and make sure that the building coverage is correct because you are proposing additions but it's showing a decrease. >> Yeah, doesn't make sense.
>> Saying building coverage verse our hardscape calculations or >> building coverage existing versus proposed. It it shows a decrease and that's not possible. Um, if you could just take a second look at that coverage table and convert it into our template that we have.
>> I don't know. Was the patio counted before or >> we counted the existing patio that was permitted, not the unpermitted patio. >> Yeah, maybe that's what's making it. >> But that's he separates everything out. So, it's specifically if you could just
double check if we are doing plan revisions anyway. Um, on that table. >> Sure. Um, I would agree with Ellie that even if though we're seeing um a decrease in overall impact, it seems to be there's a
little bit more space on the property to perhaps pull back a bit further. Um, that's all. Thank you. pull it further >> further landward or just a slight reduction in that patio because going
from 10 to 12 is not much of a retreat. >> Would you be opposed to reworking the patio area? >> So, not pushing out as far, but maybe going to the west a little bit or the east.
that seems immunable. Um especially because if you are impacting this vegetation, um it might need to be elsewhere. >> And if you can't protect this whole swath of this portion of vegetation, it might need to be flattened out and added
to the buffer. >> Obviously, you'd want that vegetation as close to the buffer as possible. >> Exactly. Yeah. Okay. Anybody else in the audience have
not hand anybody? So when can we continue this till? >> If you don't mind request at least a month. >> Yes. So, uh, >> March 5th again. >> March 5th.
>> It' be a fun meeting. >> That's fine. We don't cap our meetings. >> So, that would be great. So, uh, do I hear a motion to continue to March 5th? >> I I will. >> Second. >> I'll second. All in favor? I. Okay.
>> Great. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Next one is SE 832512 Capen Island Engineering for Harbor Haven Association 26 Grand View Drive proposed drainage improvements beach nourishment and planted Burm on a
coastal beach uh subject to coastal flooding land subject to coastal flooding and riverfront area and this again is I'm sorry Got it. Thank you.
Introduce yourself. >> Our easels have been commandeered and not returned. >> Good evening. Mark Dib with Capen Islands Engineering representing the applicant Arbor Haven Association uh with a notice of intent that proposes
drainage improvements at the existing property. Go through existing conditions and then The proposed property is situated at the westerly edge of Bass River. It's located in between Bass River and Grand View Drive.
Um there's an existing single family home to both the north and south. Um the resource areas on the site consist of the land under ocean coastal beach
zone zone line that comes through the property as well as there is a riverfront area 100 foot is shown as well as the 200 foot goes
all the way across Grand Drive. So the entire also in the riverfront area. The proposed project is um the goal of it is to during flash flood real quick rain events the existing catch basin
that's there in the parking lot parking area um that's along Grand View Drive does get overwhelmed and causes a wash out of the existing association beach
area and Um, essentially switch >> it. Okay, that's better. Um the yeah under under quick um flash flood events the the the catch basin can get overwhelmed and then basically it just
the the runoff just breaks out through the through the sand beach area and uh you know makes it as far as it can out out to Bass River. So, we're trying to um come up with a an economical way
that'll also be resilient to future flood events and then even further into the future um to maintain and manage and control a a large event. uh smaller events, even
long events that might have quite a bit of rain that you can see there's some dashed lines in what is the parking area. That entire area has a subsurface drainage system already. Um that does function quite well. Even after a large
storm event, it does drain down um in a matter of hours. Um it doesn't take days. Ponds a puddle does not does not stay there forever. Um, so it does work quite well. It just has had issues handling of a real flash like inches in
10 or 20 minutes or an hour or five inches in an hour like we've we've we've had in the in the recent uh recent past. So the the proposal is to um number one is to just provide a an asphalt Cape Cod
BM around the existing pavement. Right now there's just uh concrete parking stops, you know, that that just the 8 foot or six foot parking stops are on. So the first part is to to just Cape Cod Burm from the driveway to the north
around uh and then over to uh back out to the roadway surface. And what that is doing is just providing couple extra inches of of ponding storage for for an event that uh right now as soon as it
starts puddling and then and the subsurface can't handle it, it just hits the beach and just blows out down the beach. So one thing that the Cape Cod Berm does is just provide a couple more inches of to allow that subsurface
system to to work basically. Um then the other thing we're doing is the green strip that's between the the parking area and the beach is a uh vegetated burm. Um and again not a real big burm. It's um depending on where it is on the
site. Um the northern side of the burm is shorter. You can see there's a 6ft contour there. So the burm's only at 6 and 1/2 ft. Elevation 6.5. So the the burm is literally only 6 in um high at the
northern end and a little bit higher on the southern end because that's where the catch basin is. So the the grade drops um from elevation six to the rim of the catch basin at elevation 5.22. So it drops about 9 in just to drain into the
basin. Um and that would be vegetated uh with native shrubs. It would have a post and rail fence just to you know to have an opening for pedestrians to to to
get into the site. Um what it would have at the back edge so it's a six six foot wide burm. we would have a um just a sand snow fence that would help with blowing um sand things like that. So that'll be at the the interface between
the vegetated burm and the remaining part of the beach. Um the other component that we are adding is the at the southern edge of the the project is a concrete weir overflow. So, so if
there's a large enough event where the first the subsurface system manages as much water as it can manage, um then the parking lot will handle some puddling and then ultimately the water will flow over this the concrete weir and uh flow
down a vegetated swale along the southerntherly edge of the property. and and what that does and is partly described in um a couple of the alternatives we showed that will essent
should manage every storm event. Um it the water should go over that spillway and through the the small rip wrap splash pad into the um into the swale. Um in if you look at models for 2070, we
could have an 11in storm. It should handle that storm um and at least get water down and away um out of the parking lot. Keep keep it should significantly reduce erosion that would happen uh if the project doesn't um go
forward. And one thing that does is we've um the association has uh with the help of the town has had some engineered alternatives to to add some more subsurface drainage in other parts of the neighborhood. Um they've gone out
and got quotes of um six six figure quotes on those systems. Um and the association has so far been unable to raise that type of money for for the drainage. Um what this does is um
creates a vegetated option that should handle and and those systems, you know, could still get overwhelmed. um any sort of those subsurface systems still have a certain capacity that they manage. Um so you know we feel this is a
an alternative option that should um help the community for a long time. Um the so just to recap so the the the first part of the project is to provide some
additional ponding in the parking area. The second is to provide an overflow, a managed overflow versus just busting out the, you know, pretty good swath of the beach. Um, and then provide that
vegetated swale. Um, we do consider this uh as a what's qualified as a redevelopment project, meaning we're not, you know, this isn't combined with a new new parking lot or expanded parking lot. we're just reusing the
existing parking lot. Um so we're we're trying to provide upgrades to the best most feasible um as possible uh for for the site and constraints we're working in.
Um we did receive some staff questions and concerns. I've been working through them. I do expect to just ultimately continue this tonight, but there's a few items I'd like to um specifically
try to get a little input from the commission on and again from Britney. Um if you don't mind, I can I just pick out a couple of them and then you can go through the rest. Um the there was a comment that the rip wrap So
the rip wrap's that small uh little stone piece in the southwesterly corner. Yeah. Right there. So what that does is you know the concrete it it flows over. It's a splash pad just to manage the the uh if if there's some significant flow it's
trying to dissipate that before it hits the swale. um that that isn't consistent with um coastal beach performance standards. Um as well as the I have proposed that the core of the
the burm is actual fill a little again a little bit of fill. It's it's 6 ft wide by about 6 in order to just propose some stability to it. some I feel if even if it if we vegetate a sand berm it has
just as much likeliness to possibly blow out as um so those are proposed. I do I would like to just provide a little history. The the development was built in the 60s. Um I
did some research and I can prov when I respond I can provide some images. In the 50s the um the the beach essentially ran along the front of the property came up to the neighbors uh new uh wall. And so I mean
it it's a beach. the association wants to keep a beach. Um I I question a little bit whether it's man-made. Um this uppermost portion should really be held to the standards of a beach. Um you
know we we feel this is a good option and um just like some you know to talk about that further if if if the commission thinks that that rip wrap pad and the the burm could be allowed even though
Yes, it's a beach. Um, and just uh one more I think I wanted to cover actually. So, there's a Yeah, there there's like three comments related to beach performance standards and um we just
would like to further discuss, you know, whether or not this proposal uh kind of meets beach performance standards. And uh there was a question about a storm water report. Um we could it definitely I think which I haven't provided yet is
an operation and maintenance plan for both the existing um subsurface structures that are there that they're continued to be maintained properly um as well as the new BMPs, the swailes, the the rip wrap overflows and the
outlet. Um however, we've not analyzed, you know, the contributing area from the entire um subdivision. Um this is meant to kind of retrofit uh what's what's there. Um I could review I was just told today from
the association that the engineering department did did do some work to come up with a couple other subsurface um systems that again would be quite expensive. So, I could take a look at that. Um, so I'm kind of asking, I
guess, for a waiver or a lessened storm water management report. Um, you know, we're we're providing this alternative as an overflow. We're not necessarily
analyzing the quantity of subsurface drainage that's there. Um, we can, you know, if if if the commission feels we need to. Um but I think those were the main things that we can provide the the the existing and
proposed um uh >> beach profile. Oh, in another the last portion of the project is the beach nourishment. So, the the couple of wash outs that did happen, uh, you know,
there's a there's a visible almost a swale down this entire beach parcel. So, you'll see there is there's some contours. Um, there's a three-foot contour is the solid line with the box around it. And there's a two. We're not
looking to, you know, change thing a lot. Just kind of flatten out, you know, from the edges. just flatten it versus the the swale that's there. So like at the the three-foot contour the existing grade approximately 2.7 2.5 so it's
about six inches the 4ft contour it's about a foot um and then the five there's between a foot and six inches. Um so we can provide that that profile. Um, I think with that I'd like to Britney can
add to that or and take your questions for now. Thanks. >> Uh, first of all, it's so minutia. I need a blowup of the corners, what you just showed up on the screen and all the way around. So, you
can see where the water would go and a few arrows and things like that. So, my old eyes can can follow that. and even more so blown up than what she has right now.
The left, you know, the corner. >> This is all very nice and it looks like you have it well thought out and I don't have any problem with trying to do it without going to great costs, but I need to see what the heck is happening. >> This is what you mean, right? This where we're doing the stuff this corner.
>> Yeah. Well, actually, I'd have sectional about four or five that follow this everything down to the disposal. >> We'll come up with a a clear way, you know, whether it's a few 10 scale 10 scale I think would be great. It it would show everything. Uh we'll we'll
figure out how to do that. >> I just have a comment um on the plantings that were chosen. Um there's a lot of what I would consider like more freshwater inland plants. Um, blue flag
iris, marshmallow gold. Um, it might be better to uh choose some that are better suited to a coastal environment. Uh, bay berry, beach plum, things like that. >> That's my
accept. Um, I don't know if Britney, can can you show these photos up there? Um, >> yeah. Are those from the application? >> Yeah. I just want to know what I think this is the soil you're speaking of here.
>> So, there's no swell right now. There's just some erosion in the beach. So, these are storm photos and there's just a little bit of a >> Yeah, that one. What What is happening there? >> That's just showing the previous beach erosion. Okay. But what's driving that
that >> where that >> Okay. So, there's all this um you Why wasn't it decided to replace or get rid of the the pavement? Just seems like a lot of this
water flow is because of that. Um impervious. Um, it's not much of it, but >> why not make it purious? >> Yeah. Why? Why was that looked at? It had to be looked at. Did you look at
removing the pavement? Um, I'm back at the I'm back at the drawing now. Um, >> okay. >> So, there there is a pretty significant underground system. Um, and at least with the pavement
by going in the catch basin and then that allows some settling to happen in the catch basin, the cleaner water can go to the system. I think in the in these conditions with sand always you can see the sand on those pictures. The sand, I think, would clog up that system
pretty quickly if if it was changed from pavement to shells or stone or gravel. And I think that parking area is probably only about 1% of the pavement that would is contributing to that. You
know, there's a the the road going up that way, the road coming back from the other intersections. you know, I it was not really an option in my opinion to remove that
just mostly because of the pretty significant system that's under it. Um, as soon as you take away that pavement, every little silty piece of um, you know, sand and and just uh, you know, all that anytime it rains, that silt and
sand will just uh, go into the ground and clog up that system. So, it's an attempt to and it does work. You know, it it it handles most events. Um it just that fills up and then you that those other pictures of the wash out that happens if it does fail.
>> So, kind of what you're saying is because it's not all on here, but there's a road coming down that hill down View and a road view and all that water is making its way into your
>> Yep. Oh, okay. >> Both sides of the road kind of go down into it. Funnel right there. >> Yeah, I see where you're going from. I assume those are ele 9 foot >> 9.3 to six.
So, yeah, you're it really wouldn't help too much. So, the burm is the solution. Yeah, >> they wouldn't like you to build a burm or something out there, a curb that would fit it back into the road. um not high enough. Um what we're also
avoiding is diverting it around into the neighbors. Yes. So that that's why, you know, things are only four to seven inches high. You know, we could we could pour a 2 and 1/2t concrete wall around
there and and but then yeah, it'll it'll go into the neighbors. And one thing about this is when you know we've been getting a lot of flooding projects where it's causing 3 ft of water in somebody's basement or at least
you know it's it's causing erosion on a beach and not endangering somebody's life essentially almost um you know electric you know there's no electrical components at risk or anything like that. So at least you know
>> I just have one last question on whether or not when will you know if phase two will be required. >> So uh again um budget is weighing heavily on the association's mind. Um so
that we we would the minute that this burm got over topped once it would be required. >> So >> um
and that's that's a request. Um we can you can ask us to just do the project all at once. Um but it was a request that again the system that's underground does work well and we're hoping that just by providing a few more inches of
ponding um I mean we we've had some pretty major storms. I'm sure they're still going to happen but we could get lucky and they don't happen too. So um >> so are we looking at it Britney? Are we looking just at phase one or do we look at it like phase two permit everything
on the plan? Okay. >> Including the resource area delineations which I coming back to your comment about the coastal beach. Um if you've deline you've delineated it as coastal beach. Is that correct? >> Yes.
>> So it needs Okay. Um there's also salt marsh that has to be delineated and shown on the plan. Um, it just says naturally vegetated and I've just noticed since we were unable to do a site visit that in this photo it is salt marsh. So that does need to be shown on
the plan and its buffer zones um which could impact the end of the swale. Um, a couple other comments about the storm water. If you didn't do any calculations, what kind of rain event could you expect
this? So we just need to see some sort of calculations. We need to know how this design was um how it was how it came to be, how it was informed, what led you to make the decisions to use this weird overflow structure for the
height of the burm for the height of the for the depth of the swale. They should be informed by some sort of calculations. It doesn't need to be extensive, but they need to exist and show the evidence for your proposal.
Um, in regards to the coastal beach we're talking about, um, placing fill filter fabric, lom or rip wrap would be eliminating the coastal beige resource area, which is what we can't do under
the act. Um so when we met we did meet to discuss a phase early design of this project um and you've taken a lot of those into consideration my comments from them from then but I think I was trying to lead you into a more natural
approach um to try and deal with this storm water situation like the asphalt burm is a great idea. I was thinking more of a focus on the vegetated ele elements and that berm that you have that that you're proposing very small. Um but I think that the issue that we're
having here with the storm water can be managed in a more natural way or with all of the engineered structures relocated off of the coastal beach in maybe one parking spot areas worth of space in that existing paved area to
reduce the impacts on the resource area. Um, and I think that if you had I saw you mentioned an alternatives analysis, but I didn't see one in there. Is it in there? Uh, yeah, it's in the narrative. Um, there's a section basically had
three things. Uh, the the do nothing alternative um the this preferred one and then adding more subsurface drainage throughout the community. Um, >> I think there could be potential for
some in between alternative between the one you're proposing and one that has less impacts than this that's not new subsurface drainage. I think there can be somewhere where you can rethink this
area or a portion of it in this corner to handle the storm water and not have any negative impacts or hardened structures or alternative soils on the coast of beach surface. >> Could they put a catch basin?
>> There is a catch basin there. So, they're trying to add to the storm water system capacity, which I understand. Um, I just don't think under the performance standards this project would be permittable as they are written. Um, and
that it could be possible that a lower impact design could be thought of. I'm fully in support of planting a burm. Um, I think that would definitely help in the top just in a more natural way
with plants that are um adapted to this area. And to that point, we do have revised plan requirements that require a planting professional um to stamp or sign off on planting plans, especially when they're in resource areas, just to ensure that
we're using the proper plant material for the location. Um and just as a comment, nourishment is all good. It cannot be placed below mean high water. You have a really really tiny portion of hatch below mean high water. Is that important to you? >> No.
>> Okay. >> Yes, I'm finished. Thank you. >> Anybody else in the audience? Is someone online? I can't even tell. Anybody online? Raise your hand. No. Okay. So, we're going to continue till
you need how long? >> Probably be beyond next week. So, um I'd hate to do the fifth again. >> Fine. >> But, uh that's about the right amount of time. So, >> is the commission comfortable with the
guidance given or there you have any other questions? Um just to go back one time to the storm water. I mean the the wear is more designed with the elevations in play. Uh
and you know the neighboring streets or the neighboring driveways and the neighboring uh land, you know, it's if the water gets to elevation six, it's designed to just freely freely get into this swale before it goes to a
neighbor's house or anything. Um I mean again, we can we can take a look at some numbers. Um but that's the main basis of the design of the vertical elevations just giving this water a chance to get out and away without preparing you know
creating erosion. Um I can try to figure out the the the drainage uh area associated with with essentially the catch basin the the low point on site. um and can see what I can
provide um and answer it the best we can. But but the main basis is just the elevation related controls um uh at the property um and then with the idea to handle um bigger and bigger
events. In my opinion, it should should be able to handle any kind of event that gets to there. this uh a 4 foot wide spillway will will let a lot of water go through. So >> So in this new in this alternative, you're you're assuming the existing
subsurface drainage is still working or >> Yes. >> Not. Okay. I mean, >> yes. Yes, it it it work it handles 99% of events. Um I >> How many times did it want to actually wash out your
that is quite >> yes >> and they maintain it and and definitely like I said an O andM plan with very specific requirements on maintenance that definitely we can provide um but that's all I have and yeah we'd like to
go ahead with the continuence >> I have a motion to continue to what do we the 5th of March. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Second. >> Okay. All in favor? >> I thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Losing track of things. >> Okay. Um the next one is SE83 2515 Cape Engineering for Joseph Amarello 56 Pleasant Street. proposed bulkhead
replacement on a coastal bank land subject to coastal storm flooding in the riverfront area. They are asking to be continued to 21926. I hear a motion to continue. >> So moved. >> So moved. >> Okay, I'll give the movement and Ellie
the second. >> All in favor? >> I oppose. So next is a request for COC SE832310 C for Valentina and Mer Merchia Katchcha
I hope that's right 52 Wilin Road. Um >> this has been requested by me and uh agreed upon by the applicant to continue to 319 2026 to be able to evaluate site conditions.
>> Okay. So 319 in order to evaluate the the area and the condition. So, do I hear a motion to continue to 319? >> So, moved. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> Thank you. >> What happened to 22 driftwood?
>> It's not on the agenda. >> Okay. Uh, storm water management permit for SW2025- O2 Tigen Bond for Boston Gas Company DBA National Grid 127 Whites Path proposed tree remover regrading and paving for
construction of a new liqufied natural gas tank and associated infrastructure. >> We are waiting for the peer review to be completed. So this will be continued to the 19th. >> February 19th. >> February 19th.
>> Okay. Do I have a motion to continue to February 19th? >> So moved. >> Jack. Second. All in favor? >> I. >> Thank you. >> That's a that's a nitrogen tank. Jack >> of minutes for 115206.
Um I made one little I think >> Did you respond? >> Correction. Yeah, it was just a little spelling error. I think you misspelled Christian's name again. >> I don't think I even reviewed them, >> but I don't need to. You do.
>> Can I have a motion to accept the 115 minutes? >> So moved. >> Thank you. Ellie second. Anybody? >> All in favor? >> I. >> Thank you. And draft regulation schedule for 2192026. You want to say something? This is
pending because we updated the planning drawing requirements. They are in the regulations. So, we have to update the regulations. I will be proposing to just say see approved on website. And if you'd like to look in there for anything else that you'd like to change, um there
may be an opportunity to add some application requirements for a variance request mimicking other towns like investigating alternatives to show that a lower impact does not exist. But we can leave that up to discussion. This is
mostly to get the plan and drawing requirements officially in the record. I understand that. Okay. >> I don't have anything else. >> Okay. Anybody have anything else? Getting late. 8:00.
>> So, do I hear a motion to adjurnn? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Second. Get it.