Recording in progress. >> Okay. Good evening. >> I think this is working. >> Um, welcome to the Conservation Commission meeting on Thursday, January 20 January 15th, 2026.
Uh, we're just going to begin. We're going to do things a little differently. We're going to go start with uh COC's um and get people on to other meetings if they need to go. So, we're going to begin with SE832270
BSC for Channel Point LLC to Channel Point Drive and um this is a COC. So, we just start with Britney and her comments and there >> I'm going to give a quick background for
this project because the COC um has some involvement with a previous permit if that's okay. Um so, in 2015, a permit, a separate permit was issued for site work. They got an extension and a second extension request was denied because of
unpermitted cutting on the coastal bank vegetation. The commission had some buffer plantings required which they did install. Um invasive species management plan was also requested. They did invasive species treatment for a single season and it was noted in the COC that
ongoing invasive species management must continue under an approved management plan but none was ever received. In 2021 a separate notice of intent was submitted for regrading and stabilization of the coastal bank. The se the order was issued including
monitoring twice per season, additional species planting if stabilization was not reached and ongoing invasive species management. In 2021, BSC did a monitoring report noting work completion but some deviations from the approved plan. Um
noting that PL the plastic compost sock was installed and they recommended replacement with a biodegradable coral log and planting the lower bank with a mix of salt and marsh grasses that were better suited to the site than beach grass. But this was not initially completed. Fast forward to 2023, we
received the first COC request. it was denied since erosion was still active on the site um and the bank was not stabilized. Next steps were submitted to the applicant and they completed most of
the items in the next steps um but repositioning of the silt sock wasn't completed and there are some plugs that have not been stabilized. So I can show you some photos and Kieran is aware of everything I said. Um they did request a continuence but I suggested they come.
Um and here they are. So Karen if you wanted to comment on any of that. >> I guess the first thing is we did request a continuance so we could get the out approximately the first week in May to see if the plugs would take um the plugs were put out there and um some
of them were um popped right out of the ground. It's in a difficult area. So, they were having an issue with with the plugs being maintained. But one of the biggest things is that the the plastic uh coil roll that we put in um one of the
reasons it wasn't taken out is that even though it looks plastic, it is biodegradable. It's a different type of plastic and we have um information on that to to submit. Mhm. >> Um so it's, you know, plastic by itself is obviously not something we want, but
this is a biodegradable looking plastic fiber roll. Um and that's one of the biggest issues we had out there. We did meet with um Britney and um the former chairman at Hoops out there about a year ago. We did discuss the project and one of the things was
that we would do more damage than good by removing the roll that was in there because it was you can see where it is. There's no easy way to get that out. Um, it was pulled back in somewhat and seems to have been damaged again. It's just a a difficult area where we have icing and
um tide hitting it on a constant basis. So, but all that being said, we would like to have a continuence to um relook at things, get some additional information in there. Um, some of my staff were out doing inspections last year, so we do have some reports that we can submit. Um, so I would just like to
go back and um get gather some additional information which I think will help the commission with their decisions and probably look for continuence to the first meeting in May. >> Okay. Um, before I say anything, anybody have any comments or questions?
>> I see none. Um I um I'm wondering whether before we you redo every anything and it doesn't come back like to see a plan a proposed solution in writing by March 5th or so that we can
approve the a plan that uh was somewhat ignored uh in the uh original agreement. Were you thinking of doing any planting prior
to the May 7th date or just continuing to see how it looks? >> I haven't had a chance to talk to my client about this. That's one of the reasons we asked for the continuence. Okay. >> Um and um there is a possibility of that. I one of my wetland scientists will go back and visit the site and see
if there's place where we can do it. I don't know plants, so I'm not going to even think to say to the board that I know what we're going to do with and not do out there. So, but I'll have one of my welcome scientists go out and figure out what should be done. >> That would be that would be good for us
to >> to review something from Yeah. to from your team. Um I would only request that they do submit that invasive species management plan that was required previously. Um so that if these aren't addressed it's going to continue to
erode in that area >> which my client obviously does not want. So we will spend the money to do the invasive plantings mitigation. >> Okay. >> So would March 5th be >> March 5th should be fine. >> Okay. >> Um
>> go ahead. >> Thank you. I'm not clear. Are you removing the invasive species? You you mentioned before there was something difficult to get to. So >> that was the fiber wall. That was not the invasive species. >> Okay. >> Sil that's out there
>> which you can see in that picture down the bottom >> and you can't get to it. Okay. All right. Thank you for the clarification. >> Anybody else? So, I'm going to make the motion on this and someone else can second it. And that
would be to continue to March 5th just to get a um to get a new proposed solution and then um we'll continue after that to what so we get this done correctly.
>> Anybody want a second? >> Second. >> Second from Bradford. All in favor? I >> opposed. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, members. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> And thank you for sliding this up.
>> Met your brother today. Reminds me a lot of you. >> Okay. So, nothing to sign. Okay. Uh, next order of business is Oops. SE832337
Edward Stone, 34 Lindale Road. Again, we're going to listen to uh first go from there. Um this was a it's a flood zone only project for redevelopment of a site. The initial
permit plan um showed some patio and stoop parking area which are all a little bit larger than proposed. Um again it's flood zone only. But the only issue that I currently have is that the original order said that no vegetation including trees were to be removed but
it appears that about six canopy oak trees were removed. Um, so I would recommend to the commission to consider requirement for replacement trees and continue the COC requests until those are either in place or established. >> Thank you.
>> Okay. Um, anybody have any comments or questions? As you can see from the picture, picture on the left is what it was before and the picture on the right is what it is now. So you can see they
took down about six trees. Is that what we estimate? >> Yes. >> Let's see. >> You're right on the target. Yep. >> Yeah. >> One tree was um sitting over where the leeching field was, which is on the right. We have mouses. >> Okay. >> Yep. We had to take that one out.
>> Um the ones that were done by almost unknowingly me going, "Yeah, sure. Yeah, sure." were the others that were scrub pines that would would have been in the way of the house was a modular house. So, they were lifting it with a crane
and putting it on the foundation. Um, which would have been two of the trees in the back right where Britney's mouse up a little bit more. Other trees were my discretion and we haven't even started the plantings yet. All we did
was save enough to do the grass and cut the gardens out. But we're we have two and this is where I need your advice. Two dog woods on order uh for a personal reason to two people pass away in our in our family if
they're not invasive or if they are okay to put up. One's going to go in the circle just to the corner of the house that cutout right there. And one is going to go to towards the road right there. And we have a Japanese maple that
will go in the shadow of the tree. right down in front right there. But we would be open to, as Joe mentioned to me, what species are I should put in because it looks like a
football field and I wouldn't and my wife and I would really like to put trees in. So, now that we we're being called attention to, hey, by the way, you guys took a few more trees out than you should have. >> I would love I would love suggestions because It looks too open.
>> Well, typically when you take out oaks, we love to have oaks put back because oaks are great for the habitat. >> Yep. >> Do people put in scrub pines, too, or do you guys do that? >> Uh, we don't usually prefer to replant pitch pines. They're
>> a tap routt and they don't plant well. >> Okay. >> Well, because she had mentioned it, too. She said, "Well, I wouldn't have minded a few of the scrub pines brought back, even though most people taking them out because they're um >> if you wanted an evergreen type looking
plant, we would always recommend eastern red cedar over pitch pine. >> Okay. >> But um definitely see some oaks go back in would be my preference. >> Would we be able to talk to because I had a good conversation with Joe um and
he was mentioning a few things about what to put in and what's he didn't use the word indigenous, he used the word >> native. Yeah, thanks. Native to what you guys want on the cape now and I said I would love the suggestions. So, could I
contact the the office and find out? >> Yeah, absolutely. Unless the commission picks right now. >> Oh, yeah. Oh, good. Yeah. >> Bushes as well if you could. hydrangeas some >> comments or I
>> well I'm a fan of pine bars so but I'm outnumbered >> I mean just the pitch pines are hard to plant just >> logistically um >> white pines you could try white pine or oaks but um if you if you have two dogwoods on plan I I would recommend
that the other four be oaks um but the commission can decide >> well anybody Go ahead. >> Yeah, this is this is a request for a COC. So the COC be um uh postponed until
we're done. Okay. >> Would be postponed till 2027 again about 10 years. >> Okay. Am I right? My only issue, and I don't know how I handle this, is I'm going for a loan on
the house because I paid for it myself to pay certain things back. And as you know, you talked to Peter, my loan agent, and he needs a COC to close out the loan. Is there some sort of
stipulation that you guys do with a penalty if I don't plant them, but yet still get the COC? >> I have to ask Britney. >> You can do an ongoing condition requiring care and survival until a certain date. Um,
>> be fine with that and I I can if you kind of like a parole office, I'll keep reporting in pictures and whatnot. We we can submit an annual report if if the commission still requires. >> Yeah. >> Let me see. >> Yeah. Typically there's a space for
ongoing conditions. Um and you can usually reference an original condition. >> I can look for one to reference otherwise I can write it in. um that the the replacement trees be cared for until
2028 and established in perpetuity. Y >> would that mean that the COC would be issued with that condition? >> I would still recommend um continuing until they're at least planted. >> Sure. >> Um >> I'm sorry.
>> Open to the ongoing survival condition. Go ahead. Sorry. >> I'm sorry. What did you say about the birch trees? Those are acceptable as as replacement for the oaks. >> No, I didn't. Did I say dogwood? >> I mean dog wood. Sorry. >> Did you you said they were acceptable for replacement of the oaks?
>> They could be. >> Are they KOSA dog woods? >> Yeah. Do they would have to be cornis florida? Yeah. >> Okay, let's go, guys. Ready? I'm writing down. >> There's they're in the this native species list. Um so I can send it to you. >> Yeah, that'd be great. All we did all we
did is say sorry. All we did is say pink and white. Um, one was for my brother that passed and the other one was for my my wife's sister that passed. So, all we did was judge it on that and then Bassini landscaping said, "Do you want?" And he stopped saying words like that.
And I'm like, "I have no idea. As long as the top's pink on one and the white on the other." >> So, there's different species of dog woods. Okay. Um, the Kosa dogwood is actually a uh Asian species and there are um without going into scientific
names uh there's some species that are native to the US. Um if they were native to the US I think based on the colors they might not be. Um I would prefer the the plantings to be
natives. So if they are kosa dog woods um I wouldn't count them as part of the six if that makes sense. >> Yeah. So, I'll do they don't ma it doesn't matter to me because I need trees on that lot. >> Um and I and
>> so >> dying to put stuff up. >> Yeah. So, just this just my opinion, but um I'd like to see six uh oaks being replaced back just because they are those large canopy trees. Um,
>> as far as where I I mean, I don't know if I'm speaking out of turn here, but as far as where I plant them, do they get really big that I should watch where I plant them? And I know I'll get this information from my um landscaper. >> Yeah, oak trees will get large. They're
a canopy tree. Um, so they get one of to be one of the tallest, but they are also one of the most ecologically beneficial, >> right? >> Um, so it probably help with my heating and AC bill, too. Yeah, absolutely. >> Yeah. >> So, not to take up too much time, but
could I split the uprights with um native dogwoods and oaks combined instead of all six being one of them was taken out because of the septic system which should have been accounted for.
>> I'll let the other commissioners weigh in. >> What do you guys feel? >> Anybody? Um yeah, I just want to say and and um I'm sorry for your loss and I Oh, no thank I respect that um planting, but but I'm concerned about the canopy loss
and I I just to keep it simple I in that you have the the land. Why why we can't replace the six in kind with oak trees >> just period. Um, and whatever you choose will other than that would would have to
be, you know, reviewed as well. But I I I really strongly believe that the six should be replaced in kind with with oak for the canopy. It's a loss in canopy and that's the importance. >> So would you guys say that I should put
them more out towards the perimeter? So, like for example, where that to the left of the driveway, there was a big open area and then have them kind of cascade up to the left. I don't think there's much room on the right to put one without
>> I don't really as long as your landscaper makes sure that they're planted far enough apart from each other >> to grow. Yeah. >> Yes. >> That would be hard. require six. Christian thinks it would be hard to fit
in the two dog woods. So, I'm not I'm not a landscaper, so I have no idea. >> Same, but just a general feel. I feel like that would be difficult. >> I think there's plenty of space. >> I'm sorry, what? >> I think there's plenty of space on the site. >> Do it. >> Yeah, the six that were removed were
significantly close together. >> Sorry. Get back to my aerial. Excuse me. Would a 6 inch caliper be the minimum? >> Um, we usually do two inch >> two inch. Okay. >> The the larger they are, the more
difficult they are to keep alive. >> So, two the two inch diameter trees >> when you plant them. >> Oh. Oh. Oh, I was like, wow, that's a small tree. So, when we plant them, they're two inch ones and they grow to whatever they end up at.
>> Yeah. Um, so the septic is where the shadow of the house is. So I would go further out towards the road and then down towards that open area. Does that sound like a good plan?
>> I don't have a preference where they go on the lot as long as they go back in. >> Does the commission agree with that? >> Okay. >> I think that's up to you and your >> Yeah. You and your landscaper can figure out wherever you want to put them. That makes sense and fits with your >> Here's here's a here's a 50,000. So, I'm
putting I'm putting um uh hydrangeas in as well. Are those okay to put in? >> Hydrangeas are okay in the foundation beds. Yes, >> those black Yeah, >> that's where we're putting them. >> Yes. >> Um, one more question. If I put an oak in
that circle to the left of the house, >> is that suicide? >> Um, I'd talk to your insurance company about that. Okay, cool. >> It's going to be a lot of years before it grows up to be in front of, you know, your house, but we don't want it to grow
up and then you have to come and cut them down and ask us again for more permissions. >> Yeah. So, give myself a running >> I won't be here at that time, but >> um yeah, so planting season is best in spring before mid June. So, I'd say continue to the first meeting in June.
Um, is that too does that sound good for planting or you think you can do it in May, April? >> Um, I can probably do it. I'll ask um Sebastian Passini. Um, because I want to I want to do it when
it's the best that I'm not going to kill the things, >> right? Um, so if he if he says, "Geez, no, let's wait till June >> or no, we can get him right in in April and there's we're no worse for the wear, >> I'll be fine with that, too." >> All right, let's continue to the second
meeting in May then. >> Okay, >> May 21st. >> 21st. >> So, we'll continue. >> So, we need a motion to continue with your requirements. >> Okay. I move to continue uh SE83-2337
to >> May 21st. >> 21st. Thank you. I can't read. >> Second, Jack. Okay. All in favor? >> I opposed. Okay, great. >> You have any questions? Britney and Joe
are there for you. Yeah, they're great. That's awesome. They're great to answer things. So, >> so I need you the list of oaks that are approved. >> Oh, good. Yeah, that'd be great. Yep. >> Yep. >> Um, and I can talk to both you guys about their size and what they should be when I start off and where they will be
when they get bigger. >> Sounds good. >> Thanks for your time. >> Thanks. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Nothing to sign there. >> Moving right along. >> Uh, the next one is where am I? S
E8323394 Whale Road um Susan I hope I can pronounce this righter and um right so this is a was an order of
conditions for redevelopment of a house and pertinances within the 35t buffer to a coastal dune on great island. Um the majority of the work was completed according to the plans with the exception of a some gravel area, a rinse
station and some walkways were put in in a location that was not on the approved plan. Um to me it is unclear if this led to an increase in coverage. The the original project had a decrease in coverage overall of about 140 square
feet. Um, so I would recommend to the commission to request a table showing the square footage. Um, as long as it is still a decrease or the same square footage as the original house, I would recommend issuance of the order. Um, but
if it's not, there may be some additional plant mitigation plantings required or any as the commission sees fit. But so the original plan had the station over by the gravel driveway. there are some um red cedars over there that maybe caused them to change their mind about where that was going and it
ended up going on the eastern side um which was outside which was within the original work limit line but not in an approved location. There's also some additional gravel um on the pathways around which ab but
directly to the coastal dune. So, here's the backyard, which is just goes straight into the dune. Everything's really tight back there. And it was unclear to me whether the mitigation plantings were installed um just because there were so few required and I really
couldn't tell what was natural there and if something was planted. So, that's what I'd recommend asking for a table of hardscape to compare to the original permit. >> So, you want a table of approved implemented.
>> Okay. >> The um Dan from Down Cape. So um I did just double check um the I would argue that the the gravel we were required to put a drip edge around this thing. Um a drip trench is required and that's really all that is. It's just a you know
it's a very inert um wash tone to let the the roof run off going to the ground. Um if you don't count those areas, which I would say would shouldn't be counted, um the overall project uh still went down um 380 square foot um of
hardscape in the 0 to 100. Um the 50 was uh 0 to 50 was was near a wash, maybe went up a tiny bit, but um you know, as Britney said, all the work was within an existing fenced area. And then we to save a couple of trees, they did they did flip
the rinse station over. Um the um site is very natural out front. I I didn't really recall us doing any mitigation planting. I know back in the day there was a house way out front here in the dune and they they restored that whole area, moved the house, retreated all the
way back to where it is today. That was in 93. And now we're just, you know, kind of shaving a haircut on the building. But um some of those areas might have you know not taken as perfectly as a as a natural doing but the whole front is is very very nicely u maintained natural. Um but those are the
numbers. Um you know it's maybe 200 square foot more than it was but um still 380 foot net down on the hardscape. Um if you need a need us to come back uh we could but if there's any way based on that or a letter followup giving you those numbers I'd be happy to
provide it. Okay. And did were you able to calculate that or is that just based on >> that was that was a CAD calculation for the asbuilt um um numbers. So that's precise. >> And the only thing I forgot to mention is that the erosion control is still in
place. It would be a condition if the commission decides to approve that that needs to be removed. >> Sure. Sometimes we wait, but uh >> you forget about it. It erodess most of the way. >> Yeah. Yeah. Happy to do that. Um, again, it's a it's a it's a much better site than it used to be. We, you know,
everything was pulled back and it's a very natural. Um, so hopefully with that kind of a dimminimous change, uh, we we could we could let it go. If you, um, if you approve it contingent upon me putting a letter in the file with the with the square footages that it went
down 380 square foot instead of the 424, um, I think, you know, maybe that would do it. >> Okay, >> that's what it is. Anybody have any comments about putting accepting this approving the CLC pending
the letter of file? >> Could you re review that please? Just again what's going to the letter going to say? >> Right now we're expecting 44 >> 24 square foot of of decrease.
>> Well, I'm sorry. Uh net well yeah there was two two different numbers 424 was a 50 50 to 100 so it's 586 um um uh versus the 380. So it's four about 400 square foot down
instead of um a little over 500. But again it's uh it's all within the work limit line. It's a very natural site. Um I think they're pretty good stewards of the land overall. Hopefully we could just um let that go as they you know the they moved it over just to save
some cedars. That's the only reason I'm sure that that rinse station moved and it was uh slightly more footprint but it was all within an existing fenced area. It's all within the work limit line. So it seems to me to be fairly dimminimous but that would be the request. Uh big
>> I just wanted more clarification um that for the record that the letter include a a matrix if you will or you know so that we can see where the net the net uh came from. >> Be happy to do it. And and again this site is very unique and that there's a
huge house pulled all the way out of the dune and the whole dune was restored and retreated back. Um so that's kind of a specialty on this site. Glad to do it. Yeah, just one other question and maybe I'm just missing it. And what are you going to do about the um ren station
that's in the long wrong location? >> Um well, we would argue it's a superior location where it is now uh and just leave it because uh again, they moved it just to save a couple of red cedars into an area that was already fenced yard. So, it's kind of I would say it's a dimminimous situation and you could just
approve it as a you know um differing site conditions. Um, we >> There is something here, though. That was in the location of the red station. What is this? >> I' I'd have to double check. >> There's the generator on a on a raised pad. And then
>> Yeah, it might be the control panel for it. I'm not sure. >> Okay. I don't think that appears on the asbuilt plan. It's >> not a sauna or anything. >> Rinse station. >> No, we've got a we've got a rinse station near the house. That's the
generator. And yeah, it looks like a control panel. It It looks big, but it's just a a thin board in the in the section view. It's It's hard. It shows up uh right next to the generator as this like a thick line. So, that's all it is. It's just a just a
something to mount the panel up above the base flood. >> Okay. >> And there was addition noted there was additional hardscape and I think you said something about that. Is that going to be >> Yeah. So we'll note that and you know we just hope that it will be dimminimous. It's still going down on the site netn
net and uh but we'll give you a little chart outlining um how that happened and um they'll be then on notice you know not to increase it ever without coming back. >> Can I hear a motion to accept the coc pending the letter of
anybody second? Second. >> Got that? Second by Ellie. Okay. All in favor? >> All right. Appreciate you guys working with us. I know it's >> one.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you for your time. >> So Paul does not sign this. Correct. >> He actually can if he wants to. Um Dan, just so you know, we're going to be voting on site plan requirement updates, and I will um send that to all of our
people who file with us if it gets approved. >> Excellent. >> Next two COC's have no issues, so we're going to approve them together. The second well the second one on will have ongoing conditions but uh
>> state which >> what >> ongoing condition number 16 for 41 >> 41 standish right? >> Yeah. So, I'll read those in. Uh, SE831 1153 CIE Richard and Carol Dove 22 Driftwood
Lane and SE83-856 Martin Dooall 41 Standish Way to approve the uh COC's with ongoing conditions for the Standish Way. Anybody want to >> So moved. >> So moved.
>> Second. Second, Jack. All in favor? >> I >> Great. Anyone opposed? >> Thank you. >> Okay. So, our next we're going to go to continued notice of intent. C83 2494
Cape Cod Engineering for P RJ Resorts Bluewater Resort Owner LLC 291 and 301 Southshore Drive seasonal deck on a coastal beach velocity flood zone and national heritage habitat. It's continued from
12425 and I believe we have a speaker. So would you like to introduce yourself and yes go from there? >> Thank you. I am Bob Perry Cape Cod Engineering working with the Bluewater Resort.
>> Um you know I missed the date in your introduction. It's been some months since we were before you. So >> thank you for accommodating a very long series of continuations. Um, I think just to summarize that, um, of
course the ownership changed over there back in 2023 or so. And, um, I think some of the beach management relationship with the natural heritage and endangered species program. Um, I
think some of it fell through the cracks. Uh the um organization produced some records and uh in my you know discussions and and various communications with Natural Heritage and
with with your staff, it seemed like a reset with NHSP would be a good thing so that the new ownership would be fully understanding what the old ownership
signed up for. and we're putting together three beach management um plans for um Red Jacket, Blue Water, and the Riviera Resort. So that you'll be seeing
that. But I know this project would still have a natural heritage and endangered species requirement associated with it. Although this project is at least we you know we took it upon ourselves to try to frame it.
It's a very simple project. It's a portable 10x10 wooden deck that would sit into the beach sand be leveled up. We put in our original plan that if the commission preferred that it be anchored that it can be readily anchor anchored
enough people could hand carry it but it is delivered um by machine. They have a couple of different ways to do it. If you do recall the discussion we had, it was that would seemed to be a pretty
major um concern for the commission was if there was a storm, would this be removed? And our answer was absolutely. Today, storms are given pretty good warning.
You want to know that this deck is where the beach sand is eight, elevation 8 to elevation nine. that is a good seven feet above the mean high tide to
an extreme high tide. So it would take quite a storm to get water to this location. So that would be forecasted and the organization would take everything off their beach. They have hundreds of people on this beach during
the summer days. They have rows and rows of beach chairs. And so this would just be one more piece of hardware to manage. Not like a single family home where you might wonder if there would be anyone home.
This is an organization that has a commitment, understands what your expectations are for them to manage this thing properly. And so the plan hasn't been changed. In the interim, we did get a letter and it
has been some time. I don't have a full recollection of if we provided you. It sounds like we do. Um we we did get you got your own communications with Natural Heritage. We reached out to the management and they provided us with a
letter from the folks that ra the beach that their machine is available with very short notice to move that thing out of there. So the concern for that management in our in our minds is as long as it's made
very clear there's no fear no worry about this thing being removed and of course when it's not deployed in the offse possibly even during some periods in the summer it would be stored where I
saw it last it was on the other side of Southshore Drive on the north side of the mode with some other things that they keep there. So, there are no changes to the plan and and it's a portable
deck that can be anchored in the very very remote possibility that this small deck would be left during a storm that would sir charge the elevation of that beach, which is in my opinion very very
unlikely. But we we don't mind anchoring it. So that's where we are. And uh Britney, you may have some things to add because you may remember something else about this. Plus the um the rare species folks know that there's a another phase
coming to the main overall beach work here. >> Thank you. >> One of the things is the beach management plan that needs to be um written. Um, >> so you said that the timeline is that they want to do it before this nesting season. So,
>> we are um, uh, I think that this particular location can utilize bird monitors. I've run into some that can't. They have very very, you know, this, think of this beach as it's a big wide sandy beach and it's used by a lot of
people and I don't know the propensity of the plvers to nest here, but they can. But there are other areas say north side of the Cape where these are natural areas fully natural with dunes and uh NHSP has kind of tried to steer away
from use of bird monitors but this I think you could have a bird monitor. So, um, our goal, and I've just explained this to some of the management, was to file with your organization in early
February, so that the hearing process for these three projects that were all previously approved in 2020, there's no change to the management. If there's going to be beach nourishment, we're going to be turning in the similar information that we
turned in the last time, civ tests to the existing material, and the program would be very much like, I think, identical to the three projects that were approved in 2020. So, there wouldn't be anything terrifically new, but those permits
expired. And it for one, I mean, it's better, I think, rather than extend something like that on and on. Start fresh, new management. So you'll be seeing those probably within three weeks. >> So I do want to mention that this is a
variance. So understand that. Um go ahead. >> So the the platform itself is going is going to be permitted and and you and you have a permit. You you'd label it with a permit number and all. Is there is there some load restriction on it
that can be identified so the thing doesn't sink and do damage or what have you? >> No, it's it's a um >> I mean >> the if you've ever taken any kind of a frame and just set it into the beach sand. This is set up for probably three people to be on it. >> Yeah.
>> So the the load is relatively light for its area. >> Right. I just don't want you I heard you previously say it's a very popular beach to 200 people or what. I just don't want this thing to be I just thought it would have some kind of restriction on it for use or load to
to prevent it. >> Right. It's not elevated. Um that's one of the things about it. It's just sitting on the sand. >> What will prevent people during the day? >> Yeah. >> Bunch of kids during the day sitting and playing and jumping and doing all that stuff. >> Yeah. >> Nothing except perhaps a sign. But I
don't see it as representing a danger. It's could be just a if you see it, it has a perimeter step and it be something for someone to sit on. We did have a photo of it on the plan.
You can see it. Oh, not show up. I have it. >> It's not It doesn't load. Right. >> You guys want to see it?
>> Oh, yeah. >> Anybody else have questions? Paul? >> Yeah. I just have a couple questions. I It's been so long since we talked about this, but um what's the dimension of it? >> 10 by 10. >> 10 by 10. >> And also, no, it's 12 by 12.
>> Oh, sorry. See, even I forgot. Thank you. The step is a one foot around the perimeter. So the deck is 10 by 10. The >> then you step up. >> The one step is adds a foot adds two feet actually. >> Okay. My my um you know thinking about
you know you talk about the fact that you know the possibility of a storm is um certainly there but it's pretty far. It's elevated on the beach far enough away have to be a really kind of a significant storm. But what's the what's
the documentation or the um the ma management u practice at this facility to remind folks of what they need to do in the event of a storm? Is there a document that they have that they reference when let's say a storm is
coming? Is that in place? Because so often stuff like that is forgotten and all of a sudden we forot to move it and it goes through the window on the of the hotel. Well, I I have some long-term familiarity with these locations. I know
that the organization that owns this um acquired a number of resorts on the south side and also the Wasad in in East Haritch. Some people would say Chadam, but it's East Harwitch. And it's it's a professionally organization. If you've
gone there in the summer, you'll see many folding chairs of beach type chases. uh occasional nets. I I just think that with um appropriate management and the
understanding that really just have to say it's self-preservation. They don't want to lose the things that they have. >> I understand that. But the thing is that do they employ some sort of a checklist? Do you know the storm's coming? So >> I would presume what we need to do.
Well, they have they if approved they'd have an order of conditions, but very few people, you know, know that it's recorded. >> I just think that um it can readily be mandated. But it strikes me that the organization would not abandon their
facilities in the event of something like a hurricane or or a tropical storm. Okay. >> Can make a suggestion, Paul. Um, for the other >> permits for raking and beach nourishment, we've had preseason meeting
requirements, and we can add a preseason meeting requirement for this in the event that it's likely that the rake person who is employing the rake is the same person who's going to be responsible for removing the platform. >> That's what I'm told. We have a letter from them. >> Yeah. So I can have a meeting with the
person who rakes and if you'd like have someone from management present at that pre preseason meeting as well to make sure they understand the requirements. >> What I worry about is as time marches on David referenced before the trees you know we're not going to be around for so whoever's managing it now might not be
there in 5 years 10 years whatever and this thing is sitting there and all of a sudden nobody remembers that hey a storm is coming so we have to take it in. That's the glory of the other concern the thought maybe it's not a concern. >> I know it's anchored and you mentioned something about maybe you think the
anchoring is superfluous but but the thing is I think it's a requirement. Okay. Yeah. >> And how difficult will it be to take those anchors out and move that thing? Do you have any idea? >> Well, I believe they're going to be handinstalled. They're not complicated
or or heavy duty helical anchors. they're hand twisted with a bar. It it would just be something that would have to be done before you can uh take the thing away. >> And I see it as being pretty similar to
clearing all the the deck chairs off the beach. Um and just a proper housekeeping step that they would need to do. >> I would hope so, but the thing is that doesn't happen. I I would kind of expect that of a well-run place to, you know,
take good care of their things. >> I I agree. But the thing is, you I'm looking down the road and >> something sits on the beach and I know it's taken in the up in the winter time and everything, but someone might forget. So, I just wanted to know if there was something
>> in place that reminds folks of what needs to be done. >> Well, could I introduce the point that there are what 80 chairs or 100? >> There could be. Plus this so that they have these out on the beach. >> Yeah.
>> And you know if they don't remove them all and they have to do that during every storm. So >> Okay. >> All right. Just just wondering >> I think this it'd be pretty safe that it that it be properly managed. Um
especially if it is uh reiterated to the organization through the process. Best we can do sometimes. >> Yeah. see all those. >> I think two of the things Britney just show where the uh where it's going.
>> Um let me fast forward the other day. >> So the platform is proposed for here. >> Yeah. Um and Britney and I talked about it when we met the other day about what is a significant storm and um we would think at the very least it's when the
National Weather Bureau issues a watch or warning they need to go out and do their and we're going to put that I I would suggest we put that in our condition. So it isn't like a hurricane or you know coming up the coast. It could be that lust. You know, when I
lived in Western Mass, we would have uh great thunderstorms that we would only have maybe a half hour to have that warning and that doesn't seem to happen as much down here, but we all know those things do happen. So, um, we
would I would suggest we put that in our conditions that when the National Weather Bureau issues a watch or warning, they need to take things up even though it could be a sunny sunny sky in there at the beach, but thunderstorms could be coming with
high winds. Um, anybody else concerns or questions? >> No. >> No. Anything you want to say, Britney? >> No, I think we covered it. >> Okay. Um, just let me read my notes. Oh,
there are a couple things I do have um just concerns about. One is uh people during concerts sitting on the dune and making sure people stay off the dune and making sure people um respect if there
are um clovers or anything else that uh there's a typically there's some snow fence uh lining that dune. >> Okay. And we're going to be again submitting a plan. So if there's a need to cordone off the dune, that can be
incorporated into that plan. >> Yeah. Okay. So the beach management plan um that the national heritage required. What would be a good time span for that? >> We're going to do their NOI for breaking
in February. So it'd be the same beach management plan. Correct. >> That's it. And it will unfold at the end. We submit early February. You get a first meeting. >> Okay. >> Late February and probably wrap up. >> That's much better than my March date. >> Okay. Good.
>> So, do I um anybody else have Does anybody have a problem with the variance here? Yes. Go ahead. >> I do. Um, I I just don't see this being conducive to the environment whatsoever and it opening up a can of worms as far
as use and destruction and disturbance. I What am I missing here? I I don't I don't see this as a positive installation at all. I I Help me with that, someone.
Am I just What am I missing? C can I offer a couple of things would be more >> detrimental than normal beach recreation? >> I think it increases >> the use of like you know occupancy
obviously and and partying maybe and just disturbance that wouldn't be there otherwise. >> I I I don't >> this is this see those chairs out there? >> Yeah. Those are all people >> wandering around all summer long, >> right?
>> And I don't see >> adding to it though, are we? >> Well, that little square, I wouldn't argue that that is adding that. If it were if there are birds there, then yes, I wouldn't worry about that. >> I would argue that the beach wreaking
has more of an impact than this would. >> Beach what? >> The beach. >> Good point. This is just for um entertainers to be able to have a platform when they perform. >> Yeah, it's small. It's a triple triplet
um probably jazz, but it takes it down to the beach level. I think if and I I don't want to get into acoustics, but I know that there was some discussion about if the if it was elevated up on the top of the seaw wall, it just
broadcast the sound off toward the resort. that's off to the west. Um, there's probably some slight diminishment of the sound by keeping it down nearer to the people that are enjoying it. Anybody else?
Okay. Can I have a motion um to accept the um >> to issue an Actually, you didn't go to the audience or Zoom for comments. >> I'm sorry. You're right. I'm so used to now the COC going first. Anybody in the audience have a comment? Anybody online have a comment? Raise
your hand, please. I don't see anybody. Anybody in the audience? >> Now, may I move ahead? >> No, you can. >> Thank you. Um, anybody want to make a motion to accept
the uh the co uh sorry the NOI >> issue the order of conditions? >> Yeah. >> Isn't it a variance? And yeah, it would include issuing the or order of conditions with a variance and special conditions that we've discussed.
>> I do. So moved. Okay. Second. >> Paul. All in favor? >> I. Anybody opposed? >> So passes six to one. >> Well, with your help, it's been carefully planned, so I think it'll do
well. And thank you very much for your time. >> Thank you. Thank you for bearing with all the continuations too. It's worth noting. >> Try not to do that again. >> It's a five to one because >> vote
I guess or does that work? >> Can you vote on the Bayiew? >> Yes. Did you you can Yeah. Bradford, did you review the minutes for the baby box? >> I read the minutes, but I didn't watch the video. >> The minutes is fine if you're
comfortable, but it's up to you. >> I'm not comfortable. >> Okay, that's fine. Good to know. >> And I signed my >> You did. You gave me your >> give it to you already. Okay. So the next is the SE83-2508 Fussen O'Neal for Mark Forest Cape Cod
Conservation District and Michael Jones Cape Cod Hospital Babys proposed ecological restoration by restoring title flow of former cranberry bogs with boardwalks and sitting areas within island um bank bordering
vegetative wetland riverfront area. uh land underwater body, salt marsh, coastal bank and land subject to coastal storm flood. >> So last time we continued for D comment for a revised bridge plan which they've
provided. They've elevated the bridge over the crossing and to review the drafted special conditions. Um there were some requests for edits in the special conditions. most of them were made and a couple of them just wanted to have a quick discussion with the commission about they requested to we
usually require no refueling or washing on site um or outside buffer zones they requested the opportunity to wash and refuel on site in approved staging areas and I added with proper containment I don't think that's an issue as long as
everything is properly contained and there was a question about um a certified ecological restoration practitioner is required on the supervisory staff. They wanted to make sure that wasn't for the contractor implementing the work and it was okay
that they have one on staff for the design team which will provide oversight. So, if everyone had a chance to read those and if they want to discuss um otherwise the revised plan met all of your requirements from last time.
>> Anybody have any questions or concerns? Well, I'd like to be sure that it's not just a platform out there or some, you know, rug or something, but something with sides. >> Yeah. >> That would actually contain the amount
of gasoline or whatever it is they're used putting in there >> completely so that there wouldn't be any any chance of it going off. Would you like to see the containment strategy
before they start construction? Because they don't have a strategy right now. It would just have to be proper containment as is a standard. >> Could we approve it with your approval of the pending your approval of the containment or do you want us
>> That's fine. I think it's pretty it's a standard an industry standard. I've got a couple of companies that I copied off. >> I'm sorry. >> I got a couple of companies I copied off their containment methods, but I think
they're good enough. I'm not going to worry about it if you approve it. >> Um, they also said they would the contractor team would provide a spill prevention plan to be approved. >> What do they usually have is like a platform that a truck would drive up to
be refueled and they would have, as Jack says, some sort of a barrier around the edges of it. Is that what you typically use in >> I guess typically, but we just usually blanket don't allow it within the resource area or buffer zones um just because of the site constraints. They're
requesting the ability to do to do so. >> What would be the um >> option if we said no and how would they do it then >> with difficulty? I guess Julie is online to answer any questions. Yeah, it would
probably just delay. >> I'm sorry, I didn't hear what >> Christian >> probably have to drive off and come back on site, which would probably just waste more resources and maybe even increase the likelihood of something happening. >> Well, but we don't know the rate of
refueling and things. And how much are we talking about? 50 gallons, 2,000 gallons? Do we have any answer to that? >> I can I can give some insight. Yes. Um, so typically the way that this would work for a project of this size, um, we
would anticipate that the contractor will have a, uh, a fuel tank on site that would be doublewalled and have, um, built-in secondary containment, and they would have a fuel truck come on site to
refuel that tank um, potentially once or twice per week, I would guess. and then the various equipment would refuel directly from that tank. And so we're asking that they be allowed to do that within the staging area um as far as
possible from the resource area, but recognizing that all of the pretty much all of the staging areas are uh within the buffer zone. So there really isn't room to do that outside of the buffer. >> So you're not talking about refueling.
You bring a tanker in, you refuel refuel some equipment. You're talking about storing it on site, which is not I had not heard that >> there would be. Yes, there they would be seeking approval to have a a tank on site, which is standard for this type of work.
>> That that's uh should never happen. >> The equipment typically has to be fueled every day at least once. Um and so you would have a lot more trucks coming in and out if they weren't allowed to have storage on site. What? I'm sorry. My father was a distributor of gasoline.
So, I'm interesting in finding uh how much you're talking about gas number of equipment. >> I would anticipate that they would have um probably at least three machines on site at any given time. Um it'll depend on how they plan to sequence the work,
but they would likely have one or two excavators as well as um a truck moving material around the site at at minimum. And >> this would be just for the um construction of the area. Once once you're done it, it's all gone. Correct.
>> Yes. Yes, of course. This is just during construction. >> I just want to make sure that's clear. >> Is it saw? Sorry. Two staging areas in the plan. One of them is in the existing parking area that you're proposing to improve and the other one is at the end of Bay View Road where there's a lot of
utility work and storage on that sandy area with a large shoulder. Um I would I would recommend to the commission that the fuel be stored at the parking lot only if you decide to approve that and not the end of Rosetta Street. Does that
work, Julie? Uh, Rosetta Street is certainly easier to access without um it's it's directly contiguous to the existing farm road and so that would be the main path equipment would be using. I think there would actually be more
traffic over um over resource areas to get to the the parking lot. I anticipate that the parking lot will be the primary staging area for all of the therapeutic landscape work, but that Rosetta Street
would be the primary staging area for the majority of operations >> and equipment storage. Okay. >> Correct. >> You wanted to say something, Christian? >> Yeah. How how large of a tank are we talking about here? >> Um,
that is a good question. And if you give me a moment, I can reference back to a a similar project and see what they had in their spill prevention plan. I can I can tell you sort of dimensionally what it looked like. Um, but I don't happen to know how many gallons that translated to off the top of my head. So I think that
tank was approximately um I would say at most it was maybe 4 feet wide by six feet long and maybe four or five feet high. >> So that's about >> 500 gallons. It may have been a 500gallon tank. That sounds.
>> And how much off the ground? >> Are they going to put it on the ground and pump it into the truck or are they going to use gravity? >> Uh, no. It would be sitting on the ground >> which means that probably you have more
chance of spillage. >> It is a question. If there is a spill, um I'm sure you have um a contingency plan for that. Could you describe that, please? >> So, we would ask the the contractor as
part of the construction documents prior to construction, they would be required to provide a spill prevention plan for reuse or I'm sorry, for approval. Um, and that that would be to be approved by the designer, but it could also be required that it be approved by the
commission. Um, and typically when I'm reviewing a spill prevention plan for a project like this, I'm looking for secondary containment, spill kits, um, procedures for how they're going to be refueling, approving the specific locations. So, it would have all of those elements available for review
prior to establishing any of the fueling operations. >> But we don't have that now, right? We've never this is okay. So that's what would definitely be required you know as part of the construction logistics made it clear that it would be removed as well and what provisions would be made for
removal and and restoring back to where it was. Some of the issue is not just you know large spills but daily use spills or you know so it's a matter of being able to
contain everything all the way from just minor single gallon oops to you know 50 gallon oh my tank split or whatever >> and the tank itself all all modern tanks
I believe are required by law to have built-in secondary container containment. So, the tank itself is doublewalled and has provisions for um any kind of of damage to the inner holding area. >> Well, my father never had any of that, that's for sure.
>> Yeah, I think that's a a more modern um requirement. >> Do you have any issues? I don't I would like to see this plan. >> Want to review that at a at a hearing before um implementation?
>> Yes. >> That would be perfectly reasonable and acceptable. >> What was that last thing? >> Um the commission would like to review the spill prevention plan at a hearing prior to implementation of the project. >> All right. Just one final a question or comment. This must be pretty common to
do with worksheets sites like this. Um do you have any information about how successful the type of um arrangement that you're proposing is in other locations? Are there other problems that
we should um be concerned with or have have things been kind of perfected to the point where typically fuel is not spilled and there is containment of any kind of a of a at least a minor skill spill? Yes, I would I would say this is
standard procedure um with the so I referenced the windswept bogs project in our last hearing um which was recently completed on Nucket. We had a similar situation where the truck actually had to drive uh further into the site to reach the the tank. So the fuel tank
came deeper into the site um to to fill the tank. We never had any issues with that and we never had any issues with any spills associated with refueling of equipment either. So that worked very well. Um certainly when we are selecting contractors, we're reviewing
qualifications. We're reviewing references. Um and so we're we're looking for folks who have experience with both restoration and working in sensitive resource areas. And I would say that for any reputable restoration contractor, this is standard practice. >> Okay. Thank you.
I would offer also that we put in a condition that somebody is constantly there during refueling and um at the pump so he could shut it off immediately if something happened
overflow or whatever. >> Yeah, I believe that's that's I would say also standard uh to be included in the spill prevention plan and and refueling procedures. >> Okay. Anybody else?
Britney, you want to add anything? >> Um, just for the the other requirement that I brought up, Julie, how often is your team going to be on site providing the oversight for the project because the SER is currently on your team, right? It's you.
>> Yeah. Um, it would be from our team. I would anticipate um that we would be on site at least weekly to discuss the operations for the week and what's going to be going on. Um some weeks it would be more frequent. It'll depend a bit on exactly what
operations are happening um during the what's expected to be done over the course of that week. >> Okay, great. Thank you. Yeah, I would recommend to the commission that it's fine to have the SER on the supervisory team, not on the contractor team. They're very far and few between on in
Massachusetts and it would be difficult for them to get a contractor with those qualifications. >> Anybody in the audience? Any comments? No. No. See lots of head knobbing, but nobody wants to say anything. Okay.
Anybody else online? Okay. I don't see anybody. So, can I hear a motion? We're going to continue then, right? No, we're going to accept pending and then have a second hearing. >> No, we would be issuing the order of conditions with the special conditions
as we just discussed. >> Okay. >> Okay. I I move that we approve this um contingent on having a plan um for the um um in for the spillage and also the
removal restoration of this tank and duration. uh as it relates to the construction um and of course the special conditions as well. >> Anybody want to second please?
>> Christian I'll second that. >> Okay, great. Get your name in the minutes? Um all in favor? >> I. >> Anybody opposed? >> Okay, we're all set. Thank you. >> Thank you, Julie. Thank you for your time.
Okay. Uh, have to sign this, too. >> This one will look a little different. It's a restoration order. Just make sure you sign in the right spot. >> Say that again. >> It's a restoration order of condition, so it looks a little different than what you're used to seeing.
>> Okay. >> Um, Bradford couldn't vote, right? >> Bradford did not vote. Yes. Okay, next. Um, >> a little bit. Request for determination of applicability. >> File.
>> JM O'Reilly and Associates for Long Pond Holdings, 236 Long Pond Row. Proposed Title Five septic system upgrade to replace existing cess pools in the buffer zone to a pond. Um,
>> hello. >> Hi. Good evening. >> You would introduce yourself? >> Sure. I'm John O'Reilly. I'm engineer working with the land owner. Um, we're here tonight hopefully for a very simple um
septic upgrade. And the three-bedroom house uh that sits very close to the edge of Long Pond is currently being served by or was being served by two cess poolools. Proposal is to simply remove those um abandon those cess
poolools in place and then install a a title five septic system. No expansion is proposed for the house. Uh the owner is planning to do some interior remodeling. Um, and I know he has worked with staff um, recently about taking
down some trees and some trimming around the house, but um, so with that, I'd be happy to answer any questions. >> No questions. Thank you. >> Anybody have any questions? >> Oh, yeah. I do. >> Hi, good evening. Um,
uh, okay. So, and you're there's no expansion of bedrooms or living space with the project at this time or in the future or is it there you have a statement here that there is no expansion of bedrooms or living space with the project? Is that
>> that's correct? All all um so he's planning to obviously the house has some age to it so he's he's refurbishing the inside but he's not changing >> roof line volume or footprint. And the other question I had is the existing um
just checking my notes. You have two existing cesspools. Um and are they both are they one is tied into storm water. Uh and the other one looks like it's just abandoned I and
filled with clean sand. Um I is the one that is left for storm water treated differently or is that >> No, actually I'm sorry for the conflicting note. Both cess pools I think are being planned to be dealing with the roof runoff. >> Oh, they both are now. >> Both are. Yes.
>> And and so what is the treatment for that then? >> Uh the treat well the the cess pools are going to be filled with gravel or one of them has been filled >> okay >> uh with gravel. The second one will also be filled with gravel. >> Okay. Um and then the pipe leading into it.
>> Okay. So when you'll need to correct that note 17 on your construction notes. >> That's all I have. Thank you. >> Well, runoff on the roof is where is it go? >> Where does it go now? >> Directly under the ground. Now, as part
of the part of the remodel, I believe there's going to be either gutters improved or replaced and then connected to the dry uh connected to the ces pools >> to the new cesspool. No. >> Well, there's two existing cess poolools in it on the property.
>> So, you're going to fill it, but you're going to have the roof. >> That's right. They're going to they're act they're going to act like drywalls at this point. So, you're comfortable with the amount of space that's going to be left once it's full of gravel that it can hold. What
>> it certainly would give you more capacity than your normal 30-in lawn drains that everyone likes to put in for drywalls. Yes, I'm I'm not concerned about the capacity. Well, you're so close to the pond that
the you know once that it's going to drain off into the you what that's going to be what 15 ft maybe to the pond. >> Uh well hor I mean in a horizontal distance you're close to 40 feet from
the pond >> on that and that's the >> that's the closest cess pool is about 40 ft back. Oh, so it's not for the one that your plan points to. >> No, as as the just was said, the the two cess pools will be utilized for dry for
the roof runoff. Um I have a conflicting note that doesn't say that. So I need to fix that. But the two cess pools will will be used for dry wells. >> Both cess pools. >> Yes. >> Are you thinking, Jack? Yeah, I'm thinking I'm wondering
uh I guess the water coming off the roof isn't that dirty, huh? >> Either way, it is an improvement to the existing conditions to have some sort of storm water treatment versus none. >> Yeah. >> And a title five instead of two cess pools.
>> Okay, I'll turn off my light. >> Okay, >> pun intended. >> Anybody else? Okay. Um, what do we need to vote on? >> Yes, I would recommend a negative three
for this project. >> Motion, please. The negative3. >> So moved. >> Second, somebody. >> I'll second. >> Second. All in favor? I >> oppose. That's 236 long.
Next one is um SE832493 JM O'Reilly and Associates for Irene Holmes one parsonage point. You know, I forgot to ask people if anybody do that for >> you could just ask now. >> Does anybody in the audience have
anything to about 236 Long Pond Road? I apologize. I forgot to ask. >> Okay. Now, >> did anybody on Zoom? >> Anybody online? Raise your hand. >> Okay, I don't see any hands raised.
Okay, now we can go. Apologize for that. What happens when you take seven week vacation? Um, all right. SE832 493 JM O'Reilly Associates for Irene Homes One Pinage Point proposed in grade stairs
in buffer zone to a border bordering vegetative wetland and natural heritage habitat. >> Good evening again, John O'Reilly um with Irene Holmes, the homeowner. Um, we
were here in August um for a set of elevated stairway uh down a foot path uh to get to Alicia's pond. Mrs. Holmes enjoys her activity and um she needs a
some sherer footing to get down the uh the slope uh to the pond. So um you were kind enough to give her an order of conditions for an elevated set of stairs. Um it is a structure in the it was it was uh it's a structure in the eyes of the zoning board and they did
not grant relief to the setback variances that we needed. So we cannot do an elevated boardwalk um here. So, we're back hoping that the commission would look at an ingground set of steps
which consist of, you know, landscape timbers that would be dug into the into the slope. Uh we're not in the resource. We're buffer zone work, but we are within the 50ft buffer. Um they would be dug into the slope. The the slope on the
pathway would be modified to provide smooth transition from step to step. We do call out some gravel in uh for the back fill of the gra of the steps and it provides drainage so we can mitigate uh potential wash out. Um and so what I've
done to the plan I basically included those improvements. It's a very similar footprint than what was approved originally. Um with that I'd be happy to answer any questions. Um Miss Holmes is here to also answer any questions that you you
may have. go back to the zoning board. >> Um in in ground steps are not considered structure. >> Okay. >> So we don't need to deal with any type of zoning relief or zoning approval. >> So if we approve this, it's ready to go. >> We certainly hope so. >> Um
check my notes. >> About two feet of this is in natural heritage. Um did you submit to them? >> I did. >> Okay. And so I would I would recommend the commission approve this amendment request pending receipt of Natural
Heritage's notes. I doubt they will have anything different to say. Um but if as long as you're okay complying with if they have notes. >> Yeah. I mean I I would love an approval contingent on that. That's typically not how it's done on on new hearings. So
that would be wonderful. And then we would certainly comply with whatever conditions they set forth. >> Yeah. >> They had no conditions on the previous application. Yeah. The only thing you'd miss then if we approve pending is the opportunity to discuss those natural heritage requirements. So
>> So you're accepting them no matter what they say. >> Yeah. I don't they didn't really have anything to say originally. So >> no real and quite frankly we're re we're realigning the pathway onto our panhandle and that is smack dab in the middle of their resource. So or their
area and they had no comment. >> Comfortable with that condition. >> Okay. But we're still missing the seed mix. >> Well, now that they um Sorry, that was a leftover note from last time. They were proposing some disturbance and they would seed, but now that the area will
be graph filled with gravel and I'm sure there'll be limited disturbance on the side of the timbers, right? >> Yeah, there will be some disturbance. Okay. >> Um and I would be fine with the seed condition. >> Okay. We do call out for um I think we
actually call out for some erosion blankets to be available in case >> just in case. Yeah, that would be fine. >> So we're I'd be fine with >> in the case of disturbance >> case of a disturbance for that seed mix. >> Yeah, >> because there will be some disturbance. I mean obviously so
>> on the side. Yeah, >> they they don't need to move but neighbors live there. They live off C. only here occasionally, not even three weeks. So,
not around that often. >> Anybody else? Paul. >> Yeah, I don't remember when he came in last time. I recommended a zip line, but he didn't want to do that. >> That may be the third attempt. It's unfortunate that they didn't
approve that walkway that uh structure down to the >> I became I turned 100 last week. >> Happy birthday. >> H you know what the heck >> okay with those 17 steps though, right?
>> I can I have steps to my house and I can do with a with a railing. That's why I said to him has a railing on it. >> It does up and down. I Try not to ever take a step steps without holding
>> holding on. Yeah. One hand always on something. >> So So this this construction will have a handrail. Go ahead. >> There is a single handrail. It's a 4x4 post with a single 2x4. Just something for >> sec um safety. >> All right. It's only on one side.
>> Okay. Thanks. Any else? >> Yeah. Uh it does seem like this is an issue more with uh conservation's regulations and zoning board's regulations. Um Joe provided a comment to the zoning board that inground stairs would have a greater impact to our
resource area than the approved above ground steps. Um, so it is unfortunate that because of zoning our we're now considering having a more a greater impact to our resource areas because of
uh something out of our control. Um, I just wanted to put that out there. >> I agree with you. Yes, >> I would disagree, but okay. >> Um, do you have anything else to add?
>> No, I agree with Bradford. It's frustrating that we have conflicting regulations. Sorry, it led to a delay in your project. >> Anybody in the audience comments? No. Anybody online? I see a hand
read the name, but I see a hand. Walsh. >> Timothy Walsh. >> Yes. Hi. Uh yeah, I'm the neighbor uh that Irene is uh speaking of and um it's true. I have nothing um nothing personal
about Irene or or any of this. It's just it's all this is um within a 10-ft strip that's 15 ft from my house. And it's true that I do not live there, but I'm
64 and I may live there um soon. And so um my concern is not with Irene at all. um or for enjoyment at the pond. My concern is that a future homeowner
um may may this might be used as a uh Airbnb uh for the house. So weekly rentals and people coming down. I know that is not the concern of the conservation commission uh for the um uh traffic that
may be may be on that that staircase. Um, but since it was brought up uh by a couple of people in the commission about the unfortunat, I feel it's appropriate for me to say the reason it wasn't approved was that
that commission agreed with my uh concern about um privacy and and future use of of that path of that stere. staircase and and that's why I'm really commenting here. If this staircase
doesn't um doesn't need a building permit, then the commission's vote is is the final vote. But um since it was brought up, I felt like uh it would be appropriate for me to mention the things that I've just
mentioned. >> Okay. Thank you. Anybody? I already asked the audience. So, uh, can I hear a, um, motion to ex? >> So, move Paul. >> Second. >> Second. All in favor?
>> I opposed. >> Did you say opposed? >> Yep. >> Okay. So, we have a six to one vote. >> Thank you very much. >> Okay. Um, Oops. that on. The next one is also
SE832509. Again, JM O'Reilly, Associates for Paul and Nancy Cruz. or Glennwood Street proposed deck expansions, addition shed, sand nourishment, invasive species management, the velocity flood zone and
buffer zones to a salt marsh and coastal bank. Uh we received a letter asking to uh continue to February 5th. Did I hear whether there's a motion to continue this? >> So moved.
>> So moved a second. Second, Christian. Okay. All in favor? >> I >> sorry. What was the date? >> February 5th. >> February 5th. >> Next meeting. >> All right. We need approval of meetings minutes from 116 and 1218. I think we have to take them separately.
>> Separately for 116. The only people present were Dave, Pat, Jack, Ellie. >> Okay. So, Dave on that one, but >> you weren't there. So, um, could Dave, Jack, Ellie, and
Pat, one of you, move to accept the minutes from that day? >> I move to accept the minutes >> from 116. Okay. The four of us, all in favor? >> I. >> Okay. So, that's done.
>> And 12:18. Um, I can't vote and Bradford can't vote, right? >> That's correct. >> Okay. So, somebody else want to move to accept the minutes. 1218 Ellie >> move to accept. Yes. >> Second question. Okay. All in favor? All
those. >> Those are the good ones. Okay. Now we have to do with it. >> Drawing requirements. >> Right. But I can't find my copy. Yeah,
>> you reviewed these in November before the holidays. >> Um, and I just clarified based on the discussion we had and made the what you have in front of you. I've noticed I forgot to add a total
line in the table. So that I would um if you guys have anything to discuss on the plan and drawing requirements, please do so. Note that I will add a total line in the table. >> Okay. Anybody want to I know we talked
about this already once. >> Yeah. It would just be the final approval because we made right >> revisions. >> I'll give her a copy of my notes. That's just small things. Um there is a just on uh the butter the immediate
abutters. >> Yes. >> I presume that's saying that uh not aren't going to consider people across the street. Is that what that means? >> That's correct.
And um the contour lines that two foot that's a standard also, right? >> That's a standard. We didn't change that one. >> And linear measurements above that E. >> Yeah, we didn't change that either.
>> What does pertinent mean? >> Pertinent structures. So if there's like um a shed 240 ft away from the coastal bank, I don't need to know the distance to that shed. I want to know the closest structures. So I could put closest structures or closest proposed
structures, but even on the asbo plan, I want to know the distance from the resource area to the house. But if there's like something else, I don't need to know that's further away. >> I can put closest structures and propos to the regulations themselves and know
that what that was referring to. >> Yeah, the project engineers should know what's pertinent and if it's missing, I'll ask for it. But it should be clear what's relevant to the project. >> Makes >> sense. >> And then on K
all structures, surfaces, hardscape material noted, meaning you're they're going to tell you whether it's wood or >> Yeah. So often we see driveway. I need to >> Why not the rest of them? >> Um I guess the material would be noted for
hardscape walls, fences is what you're saying. Yes, that's referring that only refers to surfaces and hardscapes. >> All right, I'll put it at the end of the sentence with materials noted. Okay. Is that better? >> What? I'm asking what you want. >> No, I think that's that's better.
>> Okay, that's a good cut. >> At the end of the sentence, it goes um spelling. There's only one spelling. >> Yeah, Ellie pointed that one out to me already. >> Yes, etc. >> Yes. the initials of the firm.
>> Joe typo. >> Anything else? Jack >> Paul, >> I'm sorry. Storm water must be contained on site. >> Is that a comment or a question? >> That's a new regulation, right?
>> Yes. >> I was just thinking back of fuel oil spills. Um ecological and wetlands restoration projects must be designed and implemented. >> Yes. So the implementation does require
the wetland specialist >> and I recommend that you create planting plan you put it into a list rather than sentence of things that are you know >> uh the long sentence is just the qualifications. That's why it's a
>> the long sentence. >> Yeah. >> That's just the list of acceptable qualifications. You want me to listify that? >> I think it's easier for people to see what's >> Okay. >> So, I'm ready to vote. >> Anybody else? >> You have a question? >> Yeah. I just on the planting plan that's
all new to this. >> The planting plan section is new. >> Yeah. What I what I wonder about and you know it's I think generally a good idea but what kind of expense does it add to the application um or to the to the um homeowner or the property owners um
>> of applying for things or having them approved? You have any idea? >> Um we've confirmed that the majority of the people who file with us often have someone of these qualifications on staff. So it wouldn't propose it wouldn't have them have an increase in price.
>> Do they always um utilize like say a down cape engineer or somebody? >> Yeah. Down utilize a professional for their planting plan. >> They don't currently but I would like them to and they both have the capacity to in their current staffing. >> So that applies. I use down cape but I
could any of the um >> yeah most of them do. If they don't there's many of them on the cape locally who are available to do so. >> Yeah. I just I just I guess I'm, you know, um sensitive to um you know, fees and things like that. And if this
is going to make it more expensive, I kind of You're not giving me a number. You probably can't. >> I can't. >> But um but if it's like another $3,000 to have a a planting plan established, um that might be kind of ownorous for
some people who have a relatively small project. Yeah, that's why we included the size limit and also all of the all of the requirements in here, you have the ability to wave at any time. So, if there's a project that is I was saying to Christian, he asked about the same
thing. If it's 280 square feet and I review it, I can tell them, you know, you don't need a professional to sign this. It's sufficient. Um, so exceptions can always be made to the general rule, but we put this in because we're experiencing a lot most of the
submittals are insufficient because they're created by people who don't have experience with creating planting plans and they do eventually cause the plant in the plants not to match the habitat. They die. They have to be replaced anyway. That incurs an additional cost as well. So, we're just trying to improve the quality of the planting
plans we receive for both us and for the applicant in their success for the project. I'm I'm 100% confident that you have every good reason to make this recommendation. Again, I'm just looking at the the potential cost of the applicant and and maybe there's no way
around it. Okay, maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree. >> Is there any type of stat that shows like how many times um a homeowner would be under 250 square feet, you know, um rather than over and would need. So this
yeah I guess this would qu hit for most large notice of intents but most RDAs and small projects for notice of intents wouldn't hit this requirement. Um but that's where we want to see the most professional planting plans is for those
big areas. >> Um we can make the space larger initially. Um >> but I think the at our discretion I think allows us to already do that. Right. >> It does. Yeah. You can always wave it as needed. >> I would just look and see, you know, how many properties fall in each category
and get a better feel for what type of projects. >> It'd be tough to do that. >> Yeah. I don't know. >> I think also there are a number of times we've had to delay continue things because we didn't accept the plan because it wasn't an adequate. Um, and
this might move us along quicker which would save money for the homeowner. >> That's an excellent point. Yeah, that's a good point. >> We might move, you know, rather than continue something, we might actually be able to approve it because everything's there. >> Yeah, I get that. Again, I just I just
know the folks >> I understand your things are expensive and stuff like that. >> But I would also agree that we can change it fairly simply >> if we found feedback that got feedback that >> it wasn't working. Yeah.
>> What do you mean change it? this rig, >> the timing, the size of the things. And >> where does it say the size on this? >> Under planting plans. >> Oh, I see it. I'm sorry. >> Yeah. >> Well, you mentioned you couldn't you can
wave it. >> Can we put about waivering? >> Yeah. Should there be verbage in there about the fact that applicant can apply to wave the requirement? >> I'm sorry, say that again. Well, should there be something in in
this regulation? It says that >> it's in the front. Yeah. So, >> in the front. Okay. >> What item? >> Oh, yeah. >> Let's look for it. >> The commission. Oh, I guess that may wave this requirement at its discretion.
I can just put may wave any of the following requirements at their discretion. Well, >> it's not in there now, but you can add it. Is that what you're saying to me? >> It just was too specific. So, I can make it broader to apply to the planting plan section. >> Where is it? >> In bullet one at the end.
>> First bullet. The italicized. She's going to change that to refer to everything below it. >> Oh, I see it now. Okay. Thank you. >> All right. Great. >> Okay. Anything else? >> Just a quick thing on the table. Um, so
we have the 35 to 50 and then the 50 to 100. What about the 0 to 35? >> Yeah, that's not on there because it requires a variance, but I guess if they are proposing something in there, >> be good to know. >> Yeah, >> it'll point it out quicker too.
>> I I like your note where it says variance required. So maybe if >> Yeah, >> we include that and just say variance required underneath or something. >> Okay. Do you want me to add the table section to this or
>> at the note? I think he said, >> is that right? >> The >> add it to the table or >> Yeah, if we could add it to the table. >> Add it to the table. Okay. >> Note that says required. >> Okay. Can we vote on this with those corrections?
>> Yeah. >> Okay. Anybody want to make a motion to accept this with the corrections? >> I'll second. >> All in favor? Anybody opposed? >> No. >> Okay. Um, any other business?
>> Well, you add the conservation commission agenda. I mean, the write up for the town annual report. >> I didn't put that in the minutes, but if everyone's reviewed it, it will >> I'll just give you some stuff you may want to think about. >> Oh, sorry. The deadline was today. It's
already been submitted. >> Submitted today. The day is not over. >> The email it said before Thursday. It did say before Thursday. >> I'm sure Ellie caught whatever you have. >> She didn't. I might have caught
>> Well, other things. >> I would really be screaming if I thought there was something. >> No, obviously. >> Sorry, Jeff. >> There are a couple of misspellings and commas. >> It was cleaned up a lot. >> 60 had to be spelled out and things like that. >> I do have another business. Um the
conservation division was awarded funds from the community economic development physical improvements fund this just this week. Um we were approved for $26,000 for invasive species management at um potentially five parcels in town
and $2,000 for the funding of our annual cleanup day. >> Wow, that's great. >> Very exciting. >> Congratulations. >> They must be listening to our meetings. is always an invasive species. >> Those select board, they really know what >> Yeah. So Megan, the community development director, presented all of
the projects. She found a way to find funding for every single proposal that she received for this round. Um, so all of the requests were funded, which is great. And so I'll be coming back with permitting for those invasive species locations. So I'll be in front of you.
And I wanted to add that if you didn't see the select board meeting, I think it was last week, they did discuss um irrigation and uh it's worth watching. Um I think it's
about the 40th minute into the into the uh video. Um we were mentioned by at least one select board member in the letter we sent. So, um, my
feeling is they're going to be a little bit more aggressive certainly with the warnings. I just I sat there and said because I talked about sending letters out with putting something in the letters. I don't know how many of you I don't get a letter. I just get the bill on online.
And so even though it says there's an attachment, I never look at it. And so that concerns me a bit that if you know if you're a person who gets something online, you're not going to get the um you're not going to get the the message.
And uh I hope they're more aggressive. And they did talk about fines. So I don't know if you want to add anything, Mark. >> Yes, I'd like to add something. First of all, I was fully supportive of your uh request for community preservation funds >> and um I inform my fellow board members
of the importance of the invasive species. Glad that you put that in. With respect to this um I'm glad first of all let me just say thank you for asking us to put this on the agenda. We talked about the water conservation at your request and
uh I thought we had a a spirited conversation. Let's say um the board was concerned that the warnings that are submitted were not sufficiently strong enough and that we were looking for something stronger. If someone's
going to get a warning in the mail rather than just resubmit our guidelines to them, there should be something that really captures their attention and lets them know they've been reported in violation of the town bylaw. So, uh that's something that we're looking for.
We also talked about doing more signage. Uh, you know, when you travel through Chadam or Brewster or some of these other neighboring communities, there's signage everywhere. >> Yeah. >> Telling you that we need to conserve water. Um, but Yarmouth hasn't been as
aggressive or as prolific, let's say, as as some of other neighbor neighboring communities. So, um, they're working on more signage. Uh, they showed us some photographs the other night of the proposed signs. So, we're expecting to see more more of a presence. So, but
thanks for asking us to put it on the agenda. I'm glad we had a conversation about it and hopefully we can have some impact. I I do encourage people if they want to make a complaint to send a complaintant. If you see someone
violating the bylaw, there's no harm in making a call to the water department. and and the water department did say that, you know, call them and and the two women who answer the phone takes down the list. I know I spoke to them at
least weekly. So, we had a ongoing joke after a little while. I do find that when people say, "Well, I have a well and therefore I can do whatever I want." And we we as a commission laugh about that because where do you think your wellwater comes from? You know, it's not
a magic well. Um so um well the draw down from one well to another is a big difference versus when you're like south Yarmouth west Yarmouth getting it out of the
wells that are sprinkled all around and yes you may impact them there but north Yarmouth port you probably don't but I would argue that I'm a little on Well, first of all, I'm not sure that
the state is doing very well on designation of droughts, particularly for the Cape. And I my experience is that two wells on the Cape, which is what they do, that's at least my last
knowledge was that uh and they're not in Yarmouth. And so I'm worried that the people may be recognizing that they use their own
senses of well of how much water there really is. Ponds for instance, long pond, I can tell that it's doing there is a drought because I can see how far down it's gone on the docks
and there's a couple of docks particular where it really shows up. And at first on this last drought, I said, "Oh, what the heck are they talking about?" And then I realized, well, my indicator doc showed that that's really there really
was an impact. But I'm still suspicious. I've had a long history in working with droughts. Well, never mind that. The point is that I just am worried about it and I don't know how comfortable the select board is
with it or the water department with how you know when the state says we're in stage two are we really >> we could be stage three >> anything. Are you saying you're suspicious of whether or not we're in drought? >> You don't think we
>> I am suspicious of the measurements. >> Okay. But if it hasn't rained for three months, it won't win a pretty good indication that we have a problem in blue lawns burning up in every neighborhood in the in the town and blah blah blah. >> Well, I'm not arguing I'm I'm arguing
the actual scientific >> measurements, not what people are thinking of. And um >> well, I think we should appeal. I I'm glad to hear that they're going to be signs. I had mentioned that to the water department way back. I I did. Exactly. I
was in Chattam. I saw the signs that they had. I said, "Well, at least that's a good idea. >> There's a a sign out in front of DY High School, electronic sign." >> Yeah. >> There's a lot of different ways you put signs up. Is it going to be town meeting? And and right in front of the dump, everybody goes there. So there's a way to get information out there and
just call upon the uh common sense of the of the public which I think is pretty good and pretty significant to do something because as I've said before what happens is in neighborhoods I think it causes a lot of tension when one guy
is got a beautiful green lawn and next door there's a the the um Sahara desert. So, you know, um it it causes some difficulty and um so, so I'm glad to hear what you're you're attempting to do. I appreciate that. >> You know, it's funny. I was I was really
supporting, you know, real time signage, you know, like at the dump and you know, boy, maybe at a later date we can take all those signs for detour for all the sewer work, but maybe we'll be able to grab those. But, but you do have I I know personally we have a neighbor
that's, you know, a short, you know, an absentee owner. So, how do you notify them? The best way I guess with them is their home, you know, they're So, you know, I I support signage, but I forgot about the, you know, how do you reach
the people that don't live there? There's a lot of that. I mean, >> that thing's on all the time and they're not there. >> Well, that's a big problem. >> And what's going to be done if we do call the water department with a complaint? Well, hopefully send out a
warning and maybe, you know, >> I don't think they did last year. >> Yeah, but they're they're working on making their warnings more substantive so that they require response. >> I agree with you. I don't think they did last year. I would ask, did the warnings go out? And I was like mid to late July and they said, "No, they haven't gone
out yet." And I that's when I stopped calling. I said, "Well, >> I'm not going to waste my time." I always thought that um just like the building department does, if there's a violation of the building code, they put an orange sticker on the front of the project and say cease and desist. >> Okay? Now, I don't know the legality of
any of this stuff, but if I see a if I'm in the water department, I'm driving around doing my regular work, whatever that may be, and I see a beautiful, beautiful green lawn or even a hotel with all this stuff, why can't we take out a sticker and put it on the front door and say, "Listen, you're in
violation of uh the the regulations concerning watering. Please call whoever and talk about it." Make it a little bit more obvious. >> Well, the warning that was provid, Mr. chairman. Um, yeah, the warnings that they select board were told that were provided were
there weren't many that went out, but the ones that did go out were basically submitting people the copies of the bylaw. I I think you need to if someone's going to get a warning, they should get something that says you've been you're getting a warning >> and that you're subject to a fine
violation. >> There should be something that at least gets their attention that they're violating the bylaw. Uh, I thought I thought my own opinion is is that what we're doing is relatively weak >> and there's a need to improve it. Now, that doesn't mean we have to go around and have the water police going to every
town, but let's start ratcheting up our awareness, our education, and our warnings. >> So, that's kind of the message that they got. And I honestly think this issue isn't going to go away. >> I think we're going to have more complaints again. It's not and and we're going to want to revisit it again. and
and I'm going to encourage uh this board if you have comments, feel free to remind us again or let us know. I think it's refreshing that that you feel comfortable sending us a letter, a memo, or some statement indicating that
there's something that you're concerned about involving the community. And I think it's our responsibility uh to hear what you have to say and find ways to get some attention to it. So, um, I appreciate what you've done and like I said, I don't think this is an issue that's going away. Now, with respect to
Jack's comments about the the system, uh, they're excellent comments. The problem is we're part of the state system. We we have there's no wiggle room for us in it. We can't revise the standards. And the other thing, and this and and some of us know this, I know Jack does, but some of the lenses in our
aquifer are are different than the others, right? Much of the water that comes our way is from the Sagamore lands, which is the biggest sort of underground reservoir within our sole source aquifer. It's huge. It's massive. There's an enormous
amount of water that comes and and where it ends is at Bass River, the lenses that are east of Bass River, the Monoy Lens, the Chicesset lens, uh the the Pam lens, and then there's a lens in Province Town called the Pilgrim
Lens. the pilgrim lens is so small >> um and the water quality is so bad that it's very easy uh to abuse that that that water. In fact, it was probably one of the first parts of our aquifer that were abused years ago. Uh the payment
lens is very fragile. U when I used to work in the town manager's office in Provincetown, God in the old days 40 50 years ago and um Provincetown drew its water from Truro because the p the pilgrim lens was insufficient
but it didn't take long to do things that would adversely impact the payment lens. All right. The overp pumping, those lenses are very, very shallow. And if they're overpumped, if there's too much water being pumped from that portion of the a
certain portion of the lens, it can draw in salt water. You have a saltwater intrusion problem. You have sodium now levels that are well in excess of what you want. And sometimes it takes difficult for that portion of the aquifer to repair itself. um sometimes it can take years or may not repair
itself at all. The saltwater intrusion can be permanent. So I would say that from a scientific point of view if you look at it yes there would be it would be nice to improve the drought warnings
but I honestly would argue that um we need if we're concerned about the overall health of the aquifer we have to be also concerned about the way in which all our municipalities are drawing water into To what degree are the water withdrawals excessive and impactful in
terms of the water supplies that we have? Well, I think you made a perfect argument for using the Bass River way splitting in the east versus the west and actually then the state give us two
designations because expense for um repairing let's say maintain uh changing the way you deliver water.
And I have a big history in that kind of thing and I think that uh the state just ignores us. >> Well, if I could again respond, um I I think it would be nice to get to a level of sophistication in understanding how
we're utilizing and potentially mismanaging our water is the direction that we should be headed in. And I would agree with you that I don't think the state pays sufficient enough attention. Yeah, >> we could be in a situation as as Paul has mentioned where
>> we could be in a significant drought, but the water issues might be far more serious in other parts of the cave. >> Exactly. >> Where there are significant demands on a portion of the aquifer and there may be other parts of our soul source aquifer that can handle
>> exactly >> some of the demands. what what would be ideal is to have a much more sophisticated science-based uh uh arrangement. Um but we've got a ways to go for that. And quite frankly, while it may be of interest to try to
develop something on their own here on the Cape, whether or not we could get the state to even pay attention to us would be a whole other question. Because often times when we present these kinds of issues, it usually turns into a much greater fight in battle than anybody really for.
>> This is a a fight that I probably won't be on the board. I mean the coions really but 10 20 years as climate change happens and they'll have to change the way they actually make reservoirs
put in recharge groundwater in different places and reconnect systems connect Hyenas to to us and so forth and >> let me know when you want to put that on the agenda to come in and participate in that
conversation. Well, okay. >> We're talking. >> Who is that? >> Tim. >> Oh, sorry. I didn't know I was unmuted. Forgive me. >> Um, okay. I think we've talked about
this enough. I'd like to move. Anything else? >> Yeah, I have one thing on uh I went to Chase Garden Creek Salt Marsh restoration meeting the other day and um I noticed in the mitigation plan in the uh new plan that u for
hazard mitigation that that's not listed there and I talked to Kathy about that and I think that I don't know if you or >> I'm on the project team. Yeah. But we're just stakeholders right now because it's so early in in the phase of design.
>> Yeah. >> Where they're just it's not far along enough to really be put in a plan. >> Okay. Yeah. >> And could Okay. Well, I just won't worry about it. And unless she hears us, she's not going to do anything about it. So,
>> I don't think so. Not yet. >> But so, not even our report. >> No. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Um I just wanted to mention on uh January 28th in this room, there's going to be the CPC will have their um public
meeting. It's 3:00 on that day. Um I think Britney is gonna be there to say a few words. And um also I just want to mention I don't know if you've talked to uh meeting Britney the um Don Marie about adding some things in like the
acquisition of the land up at the >> to the plan. Yes. Yeah. And so that might be something you want to um come and participate in because the CPC does an awful lot of nice things and um uh with a lot of support from the select
board, from the community in general. So um and it's going to continue on uh and there's always going to be some changes in it. So um please come 3:00 January 28th in in this room. >> I don't think there's going to be any
refreshments. So >> you could bake and bring it >> do some bacon. >> I could maybe I'll think about that. Okay, I'll show you what. So, thank you. >> We have a motion to adjurnn. >> So moved.
>> Second. Anybody? >> Second. >> All in favor? I >> I >> Okay, we are adjourned at 65.