is Bob boov isn't it Bob Perry doing this yeah yeah I don't see him recording in progress maybe he'll jump in okay thank you yeah it is all right well welcome everybody to
the regularly stated meeting of the Yarmouth Conservation Commission uh this is the commission meeting for Thursday March 6 2025 this is to informally advised that as required by General Law chapter 38 sections 18- 25 and pursuant to chapter 20 of the acts of 2021 an act relative
extending certain covid-19 measures adopted during the state of emergency signning into law on June 16th 2021 as it extended by chapter 2 of the acts of 20123 the yth Conservation Commission will hold a public meeting at the date and time noted above the public is welcome to attend either in person or
via the alternative Public Access provided above again this is the Yarmouth Conservation Commission meeting for Thursday March 6 2025 uh it is 50:1 and we are starting in with a notice of intent Mr chairman
I'm going to recuse myself from this all right uh so let the record show that uh commissioner mhar is recusing herself she's the on a butter to this project uh this a notice of intent for SE 883-2414
[Music] [Music] put this off uh and we'll see when Bob gets here we can uh we'll go back to the to the order then uh other than that we the next item of
business which is a continued notice of intent for SE 83246 4 great Island homeowners association great Island Road proposed fiber roll array and nourishment over 3,400 linear feet of coastal Dune
barrier Beach is Coastal Beach and land subject Coastal storm Flowage uh it looks like we have a continuance being requested to May 1st of 2025 um is there a is there a motion to
continue to May 1st 2025 so moved is there a second second all those in favor I opposed carries unanimously next next order of business is another continued notice of intent
for SE 83-282 down Cape engineering for wind quad 10 butter cup Lane this is proposed fixed dingy Pier with steps and land under the into the ocean Coastal Beach Coastal Bank Riverfront area land subject to Coastal storm Flowage and
land containing shellfish and that would be Dan yes uh chman Hoops members of the commission uh Dan oela from downi engineering um this is a continuation of of a pretty straightforward very small Pier um waterways had um approv the
project without the ramp and float and so it's really going to be just a little dingy dock um uh this commission uh was concerned about the steps being further out and also that five foot of head room over the rock wall uh Craig Ferrari was here last time and so we adjusted to
clarify that there'll be a full five foot of clearance at meain height water Headroom uh so you don't even have to get your toes wet to go underneath the the stairs there's existing old stairs to the West that are dilapitated and and dangerous so those will be replaced and then we
tucked as you can see the steps hired up against the uh bottom of the Rocks uh the furthest we can possibly tuck them away from the uh land under ocean so I think it's just what the doctor ordered what you guys are looking for and um be glad to answer any questions if you do
have them thank you okay thanks Dan um you're saying it's five feet clearance but I don't think that's what your profile is saying is it so uh did you get the revised plan uh 225 um yeah5 so so here it's it's a 5
foot uh shows it clear um underneath the uh the stairs that's that's the indication there in the upper left corner oh I yeah I get you yeah okay and and it really consisted of showing the Rocks a little bit more accurately we get a little bit aggressive showing the Rocks higher than they were we went out
and checked them and uh they're flush with the ground and so we've corrected that and that will be the absolute Mark that they'll they'll measure up from being high water uh we'll set the bottom of that Stringer so that there's headro to get right underneath it okay all right sorry I didn't I I missed that
sorry no no problem okay any other questions from the commission I'm still not seeing that 5 feet but that makes sense to you because it it does I I speak Dan so I understand no yeah no it it makes sense the the five
foot is right at mean high water below the uh the bottom Stringer of the stairway so they're still getting the 5 foot clearance at mean high right at mean high water yeah there's more uh of course uh you know if you want to get
your ankles wet but so they can this is flat enough that they can walk around at this point absolutely okay that's what I it's not looking no I mean it's yeah it's there's any they're not Boulders believe me it's just these little little cobbles that you can easily walk through there yeah it won't
be any any problem if you have anything we'll we you know but again we can't really help what the surface is at mean high they can't go up any higher because then it's uh you know you're on the bank and down lower you're getting your feet wet which doesn't meet code so we kind of have to provide it at the mean high
water line which is what we do um and you know you've got it uh you know as long as you're willing it's not high tide easily got five feet under the rest of it so and that being said there's very little foot traffic in this area you know we're we're really um belts and
suspenders to provide that because uh it's not an active area for walking there's a it's just a kind of a back water of an area yeah I mean I think they're making an honest attempt at it so yeah so
it's it's it's not our regulation so I'm not I'm not that long as a person has a nice round head they'll they'll just get under that five feet but no we'll if you wanted 5 foot six uh there you go you still got a duck for for most for the most part I would uh I look six feet
right in the eyes yeah I'd have a problem but again okay uh Britney anything else no thank is there anybody on in the audience who has any comments or questions on this one this is 10 butter cup l uh anybody on Zoom have any comments
questions on this one 10 butter cup Lane uh raise your hand digitally I see none uh unless there's any further discussion amongst the commission would somebody like to make a motion to approve the project with special
conditions so moved a second second those in favor I opposed car genous really appreciate your careful consideration thank you on that thanks Dan another one if Bob isn't here yet
just keep going uh I see Bob he is not here so we'll continue to roll all right next order of business is a request for determination of applicability a down Cape engineering Thomas Baker 10 McKenzie Road proposed addition and garage over an existing
driveway and land subject to Coal storm Flowage Dan um Dan oela from downkeep engineering um the um this is one of the more straightforward ones you come across there's no wet resource areas so there's no real concern about silt uh
it's just you you you look at uh land SE to Coastal storm Flowage um only so flood zone only as we say um this this is under 50% a little addition in garage um the um as long as it's not a substantial addition you can be uh a
little bit you can match the existing uh which is what they're doing uh there's a note that the flood resistant Foundation designed by others is to be done so what you do in these cases are put smart vents in uh the doors and and and and the side and you make sure that the water can simply come in and then go
back out again and then all the materials beneath the base flood elevation uh probably plus two the new codee is changing will all be U flood resistant materials so um Regular uh KD stock is okay but you you don't want to
use ba uh you want to use Hardy Board and and and things like that cedar shingles are okay but not um any um wall board or things that would get wet or insulation that can get um damaged by uh by mold so the building department will take care of that aspect
you're looking at you know setbacks to resource areas and so forth and in this case um we don't really concern ourselves with compensatory flood storage in a coastal storm event because uh you've got the old pin and a bathtub effect it's just a small little tiny area with a uh the Atlantic Basin trying
to flood it so um kind of doing the best we can with a with a small site here be glad to answer any questions if you have them thanks Dan uh questions from the board no no that uh Britney no questions uh anybody in the audience on this
one I see none anybody in uh on Zoom concerns questions about this one uh 10 McKenzie Road see none unless there's any further discussion amongst the you'll take the green
cards uh would somebody like to make a motion for a -2 so moved second all those in favor I [Music] opposed carries unanimously feel like moving on here too
quickly here uh next order of business is a new notice of intent for SE 883-2414 [Music] Dan oela from down engineering I'm a surveyor and civil engineer and uh helping out uh Harriet and Raymond
fellows with with permitting an existing Pier um while it does say we're modifying it this pier has been in existence for about 20 years um uh waterways was a little was was confused by that they thought we were looking to expand it but it's it's the I would say
the uh environment has acclimated to this for many many years um the float has been there the ramp has been there um the only thing we're going to do is at the end the older float many many years ago had some kind of antlers that or braces that stuck out that they they
used to Anchor a different float with we'll cut those off but uh because they're just useless uh but um other than that nothing's going to change uh we simply have to permit what's there um you're looking at um you know several different resource areas you're
obviously in in the Bass River um waterways took a look at it looked at the channel noted that the abing peers are about the same distance out that we are uh it's 84 from the channel where 100 is required but again this has been there for uh everybody's memory um 20
plus years and it's right in line with the others around it so they felt that that was reasonable it does give us the proper water depth which is always nice you're not stirring up the bottom um so uh we feel that it's a uh it's it's uh it's not unreasonable again there's some
shellfish in the area but again no construction we're not doing a thing the old licensed is grade in in the background is a little bit shorter but again this has been there since I believe before she bought and certainly over 20 years um and uh just need to
kind of tidy up the license and and uh and and and make it official what's been there for many many years um hopefully there's uh no real controversy on this one is again there's no real change be glad to answer any questions if you do have them okay thank you uh questions
from the board we were out at the site and we were just wondering about um maybe some you know native shrubs and plants along the top of that wall would be nice and there's a small gravel area
that was put in that really should be replaced it's just a small area I think there's a picture of it up there now yeah we do have noted on the plan um I'm not sure when that went in uh but uh if that's uh consensus of the commission um
I I don't really know the history but we I think it wouldn't be too unreasonable to remove that assume you would plant that then you would plant the the gravel area yeah the um yes uh sure you know that I mean
gravel is a fairly inert uh inert substance so you know some native low low-lying native scrub shrub in that area would would probably be fine just no creeping [Applause]
Juniper Britney anything else I'm sorry there anybody else on the board no Britney anything you mentioned in the report that you have plans there are plans to reconstruct this pier in the near future it could well be that we need to
do that in the in the near future um um and so there's no date or how near that may be just my point is if you're not going to be reconstructing it in the near future um the depth that you have for
the floats is pretty low would you can you put in a float stopper yeah there's a uh there's a04 foot variance on the 3ft depth at the end of the float but this side um yeah that would be a fine condition we could put legs on the float so it doesn't
ground out earing a a lunar low tide what's the depth that you said you had um I have it at um uh 2.6 feet right now okay that's that should be fine um DM the DMF comment thought it was that you had less than two and a half feet at
mean low water that's why they recommended the float stop but if you have at least 2.5 then that's you don't need the float stop all right yeah it's probably fairly close on the landward side it's a little deeper on the on the ocean side if it's close
enough you know I think those do a little bit of damage themselves so it probably wouldn't be worth it okay that's all and um you know just I know I brushed over this very quickly but there are the those there are the three uh
variances of the regulations 04 to the depth uh 2.6 the uh I think the setbacks again it's been there forever but 63 and 69 to the neighbors where 75 is required and then um the waterways I did I did
mention it's 84 feet out to the channel and waterways thought that was okay you generally have 100 feet on new Piers but again this has been there for many many many years and the original waterways license just had this small float here so you're
really only adding the the width of the float to the waterways license is that correct that's accurate yeah okay it'll it'll probably be a fresh license because it's over 10% or probably over 10% but yeah we'll we'll amend that and update
it okay that's all thank you so it seems like everything else with DMF comments are abated then correct yeah doesn't look like anything else they they have anything else that's I
just have one question if I may yeah Paul yeah it in the description it says um where is it now um modifications to pair ramp and Float does that will will this be completely
rebuilt or just well to be clear we're it's it's modifying the license not really the float we're we're keeping what's there so it's what's there we're modifying the license but we're leaving what's there okay if we do have to change anything you know we we'll come
back and and talk to Britney see if a filing is warranted or not uh oftentimes it is if you're if you're doing work in the water okay thank you for now we're just licensing it and it's a technical change not an actual change thanks okay any other questions
from board anybody on the audience anybody on Zoom for this one as 22 to Blue Rock [Music] Road I see none uh unless there's further discussion among the board would
somebody like to make a motion to approve the project with special conditions so move is there a second second all those in favor I [Music] opposed carries un I'm
sorry this is the down Cape engineering night uh here Bob's giving me a break here yeah quickly Bob did you a big favor you should you should tell them a than thank you um next order of business is another notice new notice of intent
for SE Road proposed patio and driveway modifications within with mitigation plantings in the buffer zone to a Coastal Bank let me give you the green cards before I forget so um this is a u i I think a
pretty benign project in a really really nice area as a reminder um we're out on on great Island uh it's a uh it's a very special place it's a Causeway which that was the continuance earlier they've had some erosion issues but this is a nice safe On The Backs
side it's a open space subdivision so you've got uh open space around our lot and then uh beyond that is the um uh the trustees of reservations has the great Island CR which um uh in 1990 uh
protects uh uh 267 acres of land and um uh per their um conservation restriction is to assure that the premises will be retained predominantly in their natural Scenic and open condition for
conservation purposes and the protection of natural habitat and environmental so uh all the way around our big lot we've got open space and beyond that a huge conservation restriction so it's a very nice and pristine setting and um I feel that we're treading fairly lightly uh on
the footprint what this is and you had just closed out some older orders we did the original house back in the 90s and some other little work but what we're looking at here is the open space uh the great Island trust is around it and then the CR is beyond that and uh we're
working right up next to the house in a lawn area and just putting in some uh some pavers so you'd think almost an RDA where it's you're replacing lawn with inert uh very St you know St and and somewhat pervious uh uh Stone a little
bit of stone workout here I guess that's outside of the 100 and a little bit over here and the driveway it's a nice perious Gravel Drive we're just rounding it a little bit uh and it's back of where um it is now so very very little impact um and um
to utilize your new regulations what we're taking is just kind of a a Rough lawn that goes down in this area here and we're going to plant uh a bun bunch of it and if you take a look at your Hardscape calculations and again it's not like we're cutting down a forest for this it's just in a lawn area where
we're working but there's patio um um there's a little bit 22 square foot on the backside the radius just for the fire trucks and then um we're looking at an increase uh um that's the only increase in the 50 and
the 50 to 100 uh we're we're looking at about 700 ft so you multiply the by 709 by 2 and the 22 by3 you get 1484 square foot required and we've got, 1650 provided um again that's I think pretty
uh pretty generous for a um pretty benign project that's right up against the house replacing a lawn with anert patio so I think it's a pretty straightforward one for you I think it's a nice benefit for the environment to uh permanently have uh additional plantings
down closer to the resource areas and again you're you're in the middle of a very well protected area and it's a big lot 1.6 acres in a in a huge 300 acre Conservation area so I think it's a pretty straightforward one for you uh
the landscape architect is on Zoom if you have any questions of her um this is the plan I think it's a nice native Native pallet where you've got black chokeberry sweet pepper B sweet Fern Northern Bayberry some uh uh low grow
fragrant sumac Virginia Rose and low Bush blueberries in an extensive area of what's now kind of a Rough lawn and we'll commit to leaving the rest of that lawn just you know very natural no fertilizer mod on a couple times a year uh situation so I
think it's a good one be glad to answer any questions if you do have them thank you and questions from the board uh one quick question I think I know the answer but there was a really where the proposed patio is there's a beautiful some rock uh Rock Garden kind
of I is that why the is that staying because looks like the patio has a little indentation yeah pictures are there um I think a lot of that is um a lot of that is working around that yeah that that's precisely it yeah it's a nice native
yeah I like the way it looks ceders anybody else me anything no questions you can tell they care they have that unmown area it's yeah it's a
it's actually a very nice site um here there's one one other one out there it's it's you know without naming names no traditional it's a very they're good stewards of the environment I think it's a it's a good project and I think
it's a win-win okay anybody in the audience on this right anybody on Zoom uh again this for 64 White Cedar don't see anybody un plus there's further discussion from the
board would somebody like to make a motion to uh issue an order of conditions with special conditions mov second all those in favor I IO
opposed carries unanimously excellent really appreciate your time tonight thank you Dan Dan he's probably forgotten great either V's been fired so all right order of business is another new
notice of intent for SE 883-2414 petocka Drive proposed bulkhead and Pier system with with dredging in land under the ocean Coastal bank and land subject to castal storm Flowage Karen good evening Mr chairman good evening members for the record my
name is Kieran Healey I'm a land surve with the BSC group representing the owners of the property uh Mr David Tesco um and his wife Kimberly uh we're proposing a um peer rampant float in the area of one of the Parker Rivers lagoons
um this previously was granted an interm license and was approved by the state for a um large up here ramp and Float back in ' 06 we're looking to um reduce the amount of uh flotation that's out there and propose an 8x12 float with
three piles to support it and one tie off pile um it would be can with up a new bulkhead wall and it would have a ramp down to the float and then the float will have a a boat would be able to back into it um you'll see the dash
line that's on the screen the B dash line that is an area of dredging that we are proposing um around the area um a total dredge volume of 75 cubic yards down to a depth ofus 4.6 as you know um
all of the inlets and Parkers River were formerly dredged um when they were created and all these bulkheads were created um by man and um as opposed to Natural occurances so um these were all dredged out at one time um the inm
license talks about dredging and the the um the original dredging was done between 1961 and 1963 um we have been to waterways and we did receive a unanimous approval from waterways to come to this commission um
other than that I'd be glad to answer any questions you may have okay thanks Karen um yeah I mean I'm not a big fan of drudging for uh for effect but again as you pointed out these this whole area was dredged has and has been repeated ly
so guess I don't have as much concern with that one but uh it does look as [Music] though the wall is coming out into Beyond uh mean high water right
it's it's it's going out into the inner tidal area yes it's like why not putting it back behind the mean high water line it see say you say say it seems like you're taking you're taking new resource and filling in behind it rather
than you should I think you should be putting the wall back behind the mean high water so you're you're not taking um uh water and land under the ocean um we could move it back we were putting in this position because it would reduce the amount of excavation
would be required to put it in um but if the commission feels strongly about that then that's something we we can do but it would just it would be less a little bit less dredg sorry to put it back a little bit more would be a little bit more dredging a little bit more clean and material but we don't have a problem if that's what the commission would
would like I think I I would like to see it that way you can see what the rest of the commission thinks for can you just point out where exactly we're talking yeah so you can see it's easier to see on the cross-section that mean high
water currently is in an area that they're proposing it's over on the landward side shown where they're putting the wall so they're putting the wall Seward of mean high water and then filling in so you're losing some of the
Waterway okay I think I understand that okay thank you now the difference between mean low and mean mean High here is a couple of feet and we're above mean low so it's not a substantial difference yes it's a movement back but we're
talking about maybe 2 ft so um it's not it's not going to change anything in this particular Lagoon by by moving it backward understood it's a it's a principle thing okay okay uh anybody
else Britney anything else I do have a few more questions um how often do you think maintenance will be required in these fingers they tend to S up pretty quickly um it's hard to tell with these
because there are some the most of the Lagoon is at a depth of minus5 and it's been consistently at minus5 for you know as you go where the piece of takes Parker River Lagoon is that's already got a depth of minus5 so we wouldn't be going down that deep um but it's it's hard to tell
with different things I mean the the there are too many variables to tell you when it's going to get silted in okay and my I have another question about the tie off piling if it's if the purpose of a tie
off piling is to put the boat there right in the center the nose of the boat the bow of the boat will be there and the rear of the boat will back into the float on this this side on so the back basically you back the boat in as opposed to you P the boat side to the float so you would need both the float
and the tie off piling for that correct yes yeah that's why the the because the Lagoon is now um doing different variations of how we would put a boat in there they the one that allowed the most room was to put in the tie off piling so that the boat would be um perpendicular
to the face of the Lagoon okay and just since I know waterways has already signed off on the recreational aspect of this but um do you have support from The Neighbors on both sides who use this for their boats and they'll still have space to maneuver into their floats right I
spoke to the boat owner on the south side and um he Parks his boat face in and he reverses out to go around to to make the T to go back out and around because you can see that where the dimension of 45.5 there is pretty
shallow so he backs out before he makes his Tong so we would not interfere with him reversing basically down towards the Lagoon mou before he makes the T he obviously doesn't go out that far but he goes He backs in to the Lagoon and then a butter to the
north um we have we F away from him so it shouldn't be an issue but he's his float if you notice his float is much further out than the piling so his boat is tied off against that float so it should not interfere with okay and then I do have questions for
the land side of the work as well um what is proposed for the existing brick areas are those remaining or they becoming something else um the entrance would pretty much be remaining the it's kind of access
from the road to get in there so the brick patio would be remain it would need to be excavated and and replaced because we have a dead man right on the KN okay so it's going to be replaced in kind um you have in your site plan that
690 sare ft of existing plantings are proposed for removal there's much more than 690 ft of plantings here and I think we would want to see what you're proposing to remove and what you're proposing to be replaced in you can
submit a separate restoration or separate planting Upland plan but it's very unclear to me what is happening to the existing vegetation and what will be going back I guess if I could we're just we're removing the minimum needed to get the
existing piles uh sorry get the uh proposed tiebacks SL dead men into the ground but that would be a an amount of it and there is you know some of this has beenin the street layout so we're not planning to change that some of this is
where the brick patio is so there's not a there maybe not be as much there as you think there was there because don't forget this plan is on a 10 scale so it looks much bigger than actually it is okay and the dead mans are put in from the water side once the bulkheads in
place right or before they're put in before they're basically we'll say long to describe it long landscape ties with one of them at 90° and then they place they ground is excavated and they're placed in the ground and then the wall is tied into those so that they can't
pull forward and and flop towards the ocean that stops IT from falling in so there's not like a continuous area that you're going to be Excavating wouldn't it be very difficult to do that in just the area that you need to instead of
well you basically get a large excavator and you dig the trench back and you place them put them in back fill them so you don't excavate the entire area to do it I'd still like to see a planting plan because I don't see how that's
connecting with what's being removed and absolutely no problem with that I don't take that I'm I'm objecting to that by any means but um but as far as the tieback goes it does that's how they're installed generally is a large excavator drinks a trench the wood is put in that it's back filled and they go on to the
next one um the that's all my questions but I do agree with the board that the wall should be moved back to the existing location of me high water or closer to it so that we're not losing Waterway um DMF doesn't support the seaw wall
location where it is right now they also have comments about how drudging should be further than 25 ft from mean low water but since this is a man-made finger I think that it's safe to not yeah I'm not as concerned concerned about that one in this
particular location like that but that's all thank you the um the mean high water is approximately 3T back from the face of this so if we move this wall back 4 feet would that be
acceptable and I think that would make your keep your dredge volume less than the 100 that would trigger the water quality c as it should yeah it should it should I'm good with it when you do the dredging what do you
do with the material uh it's a little too early to give you an answer on that um we have a long way to get it's probably two years before we get a chapter 91 license to get to that point um quite often there's a container on site that it dewaters right in a container um and then it's
chucked off with from that container um it's not a largest I mean 75 cubic yards a typical 18 wheeler takes 27 cubic yards so you're looking at probably three 18 wheeler size containers that so it's it's not a huge amount of material
but it'll probably be de watered on site um and then trucked to a a license facility or if it's suitable trucked to a some of these Beach I doubt it would be suitable but um I doubt it as well
thank you make a dune back there I'm sorry just saying you can make a dune behind the wall but use the spoil for the we are using the spoil we we are using the spoil to back fi the
wall Could you um just one question maybe two um with the photographs could you point out Britney maybe some of the areas that will be changed or disturbed or whatever whatever I it's it's just a little hard for me to follow on the plan
here um I know I i' I've been out there and I know what you're talking about in terms of moving the wall back um out in the in the area of the um I don't know proposed floa and everything do you have a photograph of that that you can kind
of say okay this is going to move or this is going to happen yeah sorry my photos aren't that good is that a piling that's this is one of the existing pilings so the tie off piling will go out a little a little fur further and that piling right there is pretty much right in the middle of the plan right just about 6 ft off of the
float or 5 ft off of the float will that be removed or is that that one is to be removed yes that's right where the boat the boat will be tied off okay all right the middle of the boat actually is right on that piling I see okay I've got this are that's a good one and so you can see this is about at
high or mid tide y um so where they're showing it here they're currently proposing the wall right at the end of this wall connecting to theend this wall so you'd be losing a tiny bit of this intertitle um like Kieran said 2 or 3et of that intertitle on the edge there
instead of meeting the existing Edge or mean high water line which you pull back a little bit all right and and as far as the floats are concerned there's no there's going to be that area just this this side of the floats is going to
be dredged obviously right in there yeah yeah okay and they're proposing the float against bulkhead this Direction with a tie off piling for a
okay so the float I'm sorry float that's to the north has two floats different houses that's this isn't going to make it difficult to get a boat into that Flo or not think that was a
waterways what waterways would would address that um I mean it's going to be tight but I mean you saw the picture with the boats mhm it's it's going to be tight but that's not really it's not our our purview uh but that would certainly be
something that waterways would have consider should have been considering I guess okay thank you okay uh anybody in the audience on this one anybody on
Zoom yeah I see Chris Chris Chris is the owner of 2K B drive on the South Side his hand is raised and I did meet Chris on site we did walk the property and talk and it's no longer raised Chris
needs to hello hey Chris could you could you state your name for the record please all right my name is Chris Erikson and I'm on the south side of the finger and can you guys see me all right we just hear you but that's okay okay so
you know I've spoke to everyone in fact uh back in 1999 I went before the um the commission and I had uh succeeded in getting a um improved RDA we're going to just talk about the project um under the
hearing right now if that's okay Chris okay but the point the point I'm trying to make is that I'm trying to protect my my space and I'm not in opposition of anything I'm only trying trying to protect because I know it's going to be tight in there with the all the boats
and I um you know I do um I do have a a pending license for my float and I um you know I didn't understand that I had to go through more um you know more licensing to get it
drawn into the drawing because it's not on the actual um drawing itself the the engineer drawing and I was really surprised that's what brought my attention to this uh because now you see all that space But when you actually look at the pictures which Britney has
you can see the spacing the way it is and then when you put all the boats in there it gets a little bit tight and depending on the size of the boat um you know it could create some issues but like I said I don't know what size boat uh this gentleman has but also on the
finger end on my side I have some Stone steps that come out and that's for safety purposes because once the dog fell in there we couldn't get them out and the only ways to get them down to the end of the finger onto the stone steps and I I just don't want those removed uh it's very important that they
stay and it looks like the Wall's going to basically remove them and um that's also another concern that I have and um yeah and I just like I said I I'm trying to protect my space and I um you
know I want to I'm going forward with getting the permitting to license my docks because they've been there and I've been using them for well 30 years but only one of them 15 years back in 1999 when I got approval this RDA but that's my basically my
concerns at this point and like I said I'm not opposed because everybody has entitled to access to water but I just want you to know you know realistically what it's about and um and that's
it okay thank you Karen did you think to say anything in response or um well I had met Chris on site and we had talked about the site he had shown me those stones down on the um Southeast corner of the the Lagoon um
and we're not proposing to remove or relocate any of the stones that are down there the only concern I have is that when we put in a wall and he puts in a wall um then those stones might not be as effective as they are right now now
because right now be in our site there is um you can get onto the stones and basically get up and out over the ground but when we put in a vertical wall there might not be that same Stone axis for an animal to walk up and get out so I can't
you know I can't say to him that these stones are going to work we're not proposing to modify them or relocate them but because he's got a wall and we might have a wall it might not do the same thing that it does today okay there are I don't a safety is not
under the purview of this board but the other thing there are full bulkheads around the other some other fingers and they don't have any stairways or that's a good example right there we're only proposing one boat without a middle Pier so if you can fit those two
boats with a middle Pier I don't think we will have as much a potential issue as that particular pitch the picks we don't have really uh anybody else uh anybody else on Zoom all right any further discussion
among the board so for the going to do a continuance for the revisions of planting and everything do you feel staff can handle it all no and I'd look gladly look for continu
your next available meeting that would be so the continuances for revisions moving the wall landward and a separate or combined planting plan we'll give you a detailed larger plans make it easier
it's the site is so small that a 10 scale is even difficult to read all this information so looking for the 20th 20th good y okay uh if that's the case and
there's no further discussion from the board or Britney are all set we're looking to uh have a motion to continue this for uh plan revisions to March 20th is there a motion to that
effect so move move and then David you Paul okay Paul da Chris had his raised and he able to he did okay thank you okay he still has his hand raised Chris
did you have something else to say he's not muted right he is can I you hear me now MH yeah okay so I did have a good conversation with Karan and um you know he did expressed to me that um you know when they do the dredging because I
was always concerned about my wall being undermined because if you take too much fill out it could undermine my wall and tip it over so I but he said they're going to you know they're showing you that area and it wouldn't have any impact and also that they weren't going
to connect the walls so there was no um really there was no impact on my wall because that was a concern on how it was impact what's currently there but it sounds to me if I'm hearing them correctly that um we're not going to
connect walls and we're going to have um no dredging adjacent or immediately next to my wall so I think that concern is uh is not existing anymore but I just I just want to make sure that that's um
because I I know uh I'm trying to protect what I have and I just don't want you know the silt to flow into the new dredged area and then have it erode my wall um so that was just another concern I'm
just mentioning okay all right thank you yeah all right uh so this will be continued to March 20th uh we have a motion on second all those in favor I oppos there's unanimously see you on the 20th
thank you Mr chairman thank you members thank you bney K all right uh next order of business is another uh new notice of intent for uh Alfred L LEL 21 television Lane
is proposed elevation and relocation of a single family dwelling septic tank replacement regrading and retaining walls in land sub Coastal storm Flowage good evening uh Matt Layman strong tree engineering um here on
behalf of the home owner Alfredo Lelo um so as you mentioned the the bulk of the project is intended to raise the house above the flood plane the existing home uh the actual structure will be raised a New Foundation poured it'll be repositioned slightly um plac back down
on the foundation um the existing septic system will remain um the tank most likely will be replaced and there's uh some grading and walls involved with uh being able to
maintain that septic system as it currently is uh and to provide walkway access to the front of the building um that's pretty much it uh the entire lot is land subject to Coastal Flowage in flood
zone if you have any questions okay so we are are we still have don't have the D number that's correct we haven't received the D number yet okay all right questions from the board um justad go ahead David no you go
first no I was just going to ask I know that there was a discussion out there about the um or information provided to us about the plan to put a wall around the property um and of course in this area um typically there's all kinds of
flooding and certain conditions and so on and I just was interested in knowing um if the construction of those walls and we've had plenty of discussions about walls in this committee and uh typically um not favorable to the walls actually um could
you talk about those a little bit and um uh provide information as to why those walls as proposed will not um present a problem in the area maybe not only to that particular house but also the houses in
the area sure um so the first comment I would make is if you can scroll a little bit to the left um the current septic system is raised and surrounded by a retaining wall um so part of that is just keeping that in place rebuilding it um it's it's Timber right now so it'll
be replaced uh with a probably a concrete wall um you know the the flood plane is uh it's 12 feet um and because it's a it's a relatively small lot the house is to
remain you know uh to get from the driveway at 4 to the Finish floor at 12.2 is uh it it requires fill and in in order not to have the entire yard be uh
3 to one slope from the the front door down to the street uh the wall is required that's the purpose of the wall it's required but are there altern alternatives to the wall like for example you know just sloping um the
land down from the house to the road or like a lot of situations around here you know we'll just lift up the house on basically piling that type of thing in instead of instead of the wall structure and all the fill associated with it um
thought of those things we you definitely and so if you can see sort of in the center uh just to the left and top of the home it pretty much is sloping straight down uh at a 3:1 slope um there's portions of the southwest
corner that cannot be filled because the Lee field is there mhm um so we can't go any more great any farther in that direction uh so there's basically just a very small portion where you can see it says proposed grading sort of on the
left side of west side of the property uh to create just a very small flat area so that there is at least a very tiny bit of yard that's usable um the Alternatives we considered were you know uh fewer walls but uh you
know basically surrounding the sidewalk with a retaining wall um it would not only look pretty funny but it would present possible safety hazards you know you're pretty high off the ground at that point um the other
option would be like Timber framed steps the entire thing M um those were considered uh but this was the simplest most straightforward way to maintain the septic system uh a reasonable compromise with the yard and
and to provide you know convenient access from the driveway to the home okay all right other people ask questions thank you so I have a concern I don't know if you maybe just answered it but we've had problems with the
across the with the road flooding and the people across the street we here I think last meeting about it um how is this is the wall going to make that worse no um it it it won't make it worse um you know we're not changing the cover
type in any way the lawn will still be lawn so there's uh I believe it's 700 Square F feet increase in impervious over the uh current conditions uh we do plan and show on the plan that a dryw will be added to connect to the roof drains uh to compensate for that 700 squ
fet additional impervious but um it it will not make flood conditions in the area worse just a question how do you determine that how do you determine that this won't cause a problem could you tell me what the an so this entire area is a
flood zone and is land subject to Coastal Flowage so um as was mentioned previously in the night you know you're you're fighting the ocean and so a small amount of fill on one lot does not have an impact on neighboring it just doesn't
but don't the walls redirect water and then cause like turbulence and other areas and Vel there's velocity factors and all that kind of there's a you know it's all flooded and now it's hitting these walls instead of um slopes and so on and so forth I am not aware of any
technical reason why that would be true okay all right maybe somebody else is thank you David anything else no thank you anybody else on the board Britney I think all my concerns have
been addressed by the board um I think generally this board tries to avoid solid walls in the flood zone but if there's no other alternative that won't have significant improvements to the impact that is already shown then
I guess that is all right I see the only other alternative to have its slope um closer toward the road but it would still be providing that same redirection of the flood waters it would just be against a slightly sloped area instead of a flat vertical surface so so you
agree it wouldn't you're saying it wouldn't um the wall as opposed to the slope it doesn't make any difference I don't think it would be a big enough difference for us to ask for such a thing unless there is evidence otherwise especially along thatle whole road though yeah so it's not going to have
any any difference along that entire Road the houses across the street the houses next door I mean I don't have data saying it won't make a difference but okay all right I mean you're so you'll be bringing in Phil correct correct um I'm
not quite sure what I mean I don't know that I've I've heard the case made for uh piles yet I mean that that would be another alternative I I understand why you don't want to do piles because you add
significantly to the cost but if you did piles then you wouldn't be doing any fill and you wouldn't be doing or very very little fill and you'd have a much reduced uh wall
right that's probably true yes keeping in mind that the southwest corner has to have a wall and must yeah but it would be a much much smaller smaller footprint of wall and uh hence
deflective possibilities but uh anybody in the audience on this anybody on Zoom I see somebody I can't read what the name is Karina Karina uh Karina do you have a comment or question on on
this project hello can you hear me yeah you just I state your name for the record please my name is Karina corov I am with strong tree engineering actually I'm with u Matt Layman there who is
presenting uh I just wanted to um make a couple comments um regarding your statement about the wall um there are a few comments to make one is that the neighbors all recognize
that that particular lot the 21 television Lane Lot is the low point of the neighborhood and they according to our uh homeowner client uh are all in agreement that they need to do something
about that because essentially the house is within existing within the beneath the the flood uh level there so it needs to be amended uh and they have all agreed to
his plan according to what we understand um also by raising the level and adding the wall we also are introducing recharge basins where the storm water is Flowing off of the impervious surfaces
the roof so that's all going into a recharge Basin which will slow down the Flowage of the storm water and actually will reduce
the impact of storm water to the local area because we're improving the overall storm Water Management Systems if that makes sense all also by adding grade to the property we are adding an area where
water can infiltrate rather than immediately do you know what I'm saying immediately in a flood layer by having that added soil it has some time to infiltrate so we are actually improving
the overall flood and this added uh water can go through our our storm water systems smoothly and without devastating effect to the neighborhood um and so I just wanted to make a statement
uh to that effect thank you okay thank you if you'd like to make a comment excuse me would you mind going to the microphone so people online can hear you my name is Alfredo lato I'm the uh
homeowner um I've had I just wanted to add that I've had great support from all of the board members all of my abing neighbors um I have had nobody I've showed this plan to the board my
neighbors um and everybody around me and nobody has objected to it um they all thought it was a great idea um I explained to him about the recharging and of course the soil absorbing more water than pushing it on the street I
think you guys all saw the water in the street at the last meeting with my direct neighbor Ron serving across the street um that's a drainage issue with the main road um I've brought that to the
association's attention but it's I don't want to go back and forth with the association so I'm trying to fix my problem with my land and my direct property to get it out of
Ham's way at this point um I don't think that pilings personally look great in my opinion I think it's costing me a lot more money to build a wall surrounding
the property and sloping it up um for parents of the neighborhood um that's you know and I've had great support from everyone for it that's all thank you thank
you uh is there any further discussion or questions from the board um yeah actually I did have a question based on uh Katarina's comments um she said that your property was kind of the low spot of the
neighborhood um and so I guess I'm wondering if you are putting in a wall where is that new low spot going to be is that going to be your neighbor across the street or where is that flood water go yeah so to be precise the the low
point is the existing catch Basin if you can please scroll to the left yeah on the top left that is the lowest point which is off the property line and uh will not be altered as a result of this project okay
so you know sort of uh generically speaking the it is the low point but the actual precise point is that catch basin which is not uh proposed to be altered okay okay anybody
else just as a point um I wanted to comment on Katarina's storm water management and that I do recognize that this is an improvement to the storm water management but the flooding that we see at this site is groundwater and ocean water that comes straight over
seagull Road and that is going to lose all of this area to infiltrate instead of an improvement it's an improvement to storm water only it's not an improvement to the flood zone and its ability to accept those flood waters so groundwater
can't infiltrate but ocean water can right um so that would be a temporary you know generally at least it it's less than a 24hour event um again if if this area is flooded by ocean water then the entire area is
flooded with ocean water and uh raising the property will have no effect on that raising the house would have no effect on that I I would agree yeah the property the whole property might have a little bit it would be pushing that that those flood waters although yes the volume might not make a huge difference
but you'd still be pushing those flood waters to the road where other people use and are is off property that's all thank you okay so can I just add one more thing sure um as
I said I've been trying to work with the association because I'm very well aware that they are responsible for the drainage in the road um and our agreement is that uh when there is flooding in the road uh and this is a
new agreement that we've had recently um that we have a plan in place that the they call for pumping immediately and proactively to have the water pumped out
um so it doesn't just stand there or sit there of course if it's a you know large storm and it's ocean water coming over from seagull Road that's out of our control but again the whole
neighborhood floods at that point not just television Lane um so I have been working with the association they've been very Cooperative um they understand
that it is a Association as a whole issue but they're temporary uh fix to it until a permanent fix is in place is we have unlimited funds to call for pumping at any time
and that's from the board okay thank you thank you all right so we don't have a d number we will have to continue for the for the sole purpose of uh receiving that d uh file number and
comment uh I mean we can we if you're if you feel like you're ready to go and you don't have to wait for D comment I mean we still have to wait for D comment but um you can go ahead we can go ahead and and uh oh no I can't do
that uh I think it would it' be best just for us to continue so solely for the purpose of receiving uh D comment and file number and then we'll we'll close the hearing uh hopefully on the 20th that sound right has there been a
consensus about the wall should you agree about something so if you're going to continue solely for D number you can't discuss the wall any further so just want to make sure the board members are all on the same page I'm good with that but I'm fine could you repeat that again
please so uh so we're we're continuing for the D comment only uh which means uh that everybody's made their decision as and they can't discuss the wall I see any further than or I mean we could just
if you'd rather I can just we can just continue it until uh March 20th and allow for full comment um if you have anything further to to add on that the the EP uh comments wouldn't
address any part of the whether the wall is appropriate or not is that correct or might I mean they they would they're I mean I I I would kind of doubt they're going to have any comments do do you think recently D has been very quiet
yeah so I I doubt they will have any comments about any any part of the project yeah okay okay okay all right would you rather continue just in general and then yeah I think that I think it would be a good idea personally
I think so okay so U Can I have a motion to um to continue the project to uh March 20th so so moved second uh thank you so much may I request uh
some sort of an email to if you do need some time to review and ask us for further information is there some sort of a timeline we might expect for that or should we simply anticipate that you need the D number
and we would go from there I think we're really basically waiting on the D number uh I think you've heard everybody's comments as far as the rest of the project goes uh we're just keeping it open in order to if if there's any further but if
there's any further comment then we would wait until the following uh meeting uh and you would be given time to respond to that if if we have any issues like that okay thank you very much okay all right uh all those in favor for
Contin I did I already take it oh you didn't do that part yet okay all those in favor continue today to March 20th I opposed there unanimously thank you very
much thank you all right before I go on to uh enforcement because I think this is going to take some time I am going to go out on a limb and say that Bob Perry is probably not showing
up at this meeting and I don't want to have the uh I assume you're all AB butters for that for that uh for the um oyster yeah Oyster Oyster Cove Road wait what's this
say not sure file request for s uh actually can I uh I'm going to ask for a a like a three minute um three minute recess if that's okay all right I just so we stand re in recess for three
minutes we will return at approximately 6 6:18 p.m. all right e e e e e e
at 6 well it's not almost now we are I think we're on 68 now all right so the time is now 6:18 and we are reconvening uh the Yarmouth
Conservation Commission uh meeting for uh Thursday March 6 2025 um so uh we are not going to have a a representative for uh 59 Oyster Cove
Road easement uh tonight so what I'd like to do is just table it for now which will give them the opportunity um and one way or the other it should be resolved by by March 20th
um and we'll go from there uh but I I don't want to make you keep hanging around waiting for for this we we did receive a a message that um that Bob is not going to be here tonight so um we'll table it until March 20th and
we'll make that resolution at some point then on that at that meeting all right I'm once again I apologize for dragging you all out of here and waiting but that's unfortunately he he yeah he he just didn't send anything until we were
already in the meeting at that when he sent the email so anyhow um with that uh we will table [Applause] that and with that we'll move on to our next order of business which is a
continued enforcement hearing as blue flax designed for Nance Carbone 14 and 20 kingsberry way uh violation of special conditions 10 through1 13 1518 of SE 883-2414 to finish the project that was
begun um under the former um under the former order of conditions um and meet the conditions that had not been met um under that expired order of conditions um mainly the restoration plantings um
the shrub plantings in the area um which we uh Nancy Carboni um testified at the last hearing were indeed planted but had died um they were mainly araceous species were approved um by the previous commission previous agent under the old
D um or under the old order of conditions um and um so we were proposing to restore that area with Native shrubs um grasses wild flowers and trees as well as um plant native
shrubs in the buffer zone to the top to the bordering vegetated Wetland um in lie of a split rail fence which was required um in the previous order of conditions the expired order of conditions um and then the commission requested that Topo be placed on the
plan so um the things that we have done um in in updating the plans number one we have increased the um the density of the planting within the buffer zone um to better make sure that we're to ensure that we're completely protecting the
buffer zone and the Wetland from um intrusion from mowed lawn from lawn mowing Etc um the second thing that we've done is we were again in the short period of time um that we had to get toppo on the plan the surveyor was not able to get out there to do a survey we
used Mass GIS we've placed twoot Contours from massgis on the plan submitted a plan showing topography with those um two foot um contour lines from Mass GIS um which I feel is is pretty accurate um as far as what we've
experienced in the field this is a relatively level lot believe this is former cranberry B there's a slope um definitely man-made not a natural slope that runs around this area and you can see that with elevations 12 and 14 um so that is a that is that slope is
present here um and then I think the the where the properties are where the private property is the carbonis property is fairly level um but does slope down towards the Wetland area and then once you're out in the Wetland area itself um from elevation 10 to Elevation
8 it's it's fairly flat um which I think we've experienced um from those of you who've been out to the site um and then from the pictures that we've included in our proposed Land Management plan so um I think with that we've answered those
questions I know Britney and I have talked about whether or not these toppo lines need to be picked up by a professional land surveyor um we're not filing a notice of intent we're answering an enforcement order and we're trying to close out a previous um a previously issued order of conditions
and we're trying try to satisfy those three conditions that had not pre that had not been met um so we're doing that under the enforcement order I think the topography that we're showing from Mass J gives you an idea of what's happening at the site from a from a topography perspective um and really I think the
focus of the plan is what we're proposing to do for restoration so I'm happy to answer any continued questions about any of those things um and about the proposed restoration I would like to note that in the proposed restoration overall we're proposing three trees 484
shrubs um which is a significant um restoration for this area we also have existing clora um in this area as well as some Bas that will be allowed to continue to naturalize we are proposing to manage the fragm mites that is moving into the vegetated Wetland um on the
East lot and the clumps of bamboo that are coming back um and to review the overall plan we're proposing to come in remove all of the vegetative debris that was left behind in the area from the the previous mowing in order to get good soil contact for seed mix we're using um
a obl obligate fact wet seed mix within the meadow area we are proposing to do some mowing in those areas while the meadow establishes to manage the fragm mies and the bamboo and then allow it to naturalize so we are proposing to mow for three seasons and when I say mow I
mean go in with a string trimmer and work our way around the shrubs we're planting the shrubs in naturalized clusters so that we can do that and then they'll be allowed to natur but we would really like to make sure that we're getting that bamboo out of there and we're getting some control over the frag mes we also recognize that there's going
to be continuous fragm mines pressure from the um from the salt marsh in the area um to the north and to the west of this so at least by doing a couple of years of mowing allowing the shrubs to establish allowing that ground cover layer to establish we'll have a little
bit of a chance um to try and keep that frag mes out of the area um ideally and ultimately the carbon started this project because the bamboo and the fragm mies was um colonizing their lawn and infesting their um their private
property which is what prompted them to um file a notice of intent with the original filing to manage the bamboo and the fragm out in these areas so they would like to try and keep that at Bay if possible thank you okay so uh just for a point of
clarification Coastal banks are not something you can do off like the M the massgis Contours those Coastal banks are the one thing that you have to have an engineer or a surveyor uh do work work for uh because
they're the they're really the only people who kind do the identification of the of the slopes that are required based on on field conditions so uh Contours from massgis do not cut it in terms of being
able to determine a Coastal Bank presence of a Coastal Bank yes um the origin uh of of a wetland system bank and or or anything else uh it it in the eyes of the Wetland protection act
doesn't matter if it's man-made or natural it's still a bank sure so the the the man-made feature doesn't play into this as well mhm uh I still have an issue uh with
the uh lack of of demarcation uh at the mitigation area uh I know there were some people who were I guess were were saying that you know more more uh vegetation uh is okay I don't agree with
that I think there's a variety of different way I get it that it's it's expensive but you shouldn't have you shouldn't have made the mistake and and and committed the violations and we wouldn't be in this place in this situation then so
um I think uh personally I would want to see some sort of a line of demarcation along that the mitigation area that's all I have to say I'll turn it over to the rest of the [Applause] board this is where you guys would talk
yeah yeah I I just have a couple of questions maybe based on some of what you just said at the um you talk about the mitigation area and I'm looking at the plan and I've been out there and it seems like um that whole bordering vegetated Wetlands you know that's been cleared
out is Way Beyond the property owners um line in the back and so it it troubles me to um think about even though maybe I don't enjoy frag mes and certainly I'm no fan of bamboo either but it's that
stuff is at at this point way off the property and um I don't see why this group should allow any kind of mowing or or um um I don't know if
mitigation is the proper word for all that land beyond the property owner's um backyard border okay and and in fact I did see a note having to do with um um you know the the the town
owns the property so what kind of communication was done what kind of permission was done um maybe it was maybe it wasn't I kind of don't remember in the long discussions about this um to to go ahead and and and work the way uh
the the work was done on that on that property so um and I think in a way it also to Me Maybe it maybe I'm wrong but it seems to set up a an interesting precedent for homeowners to go out into
the marsh area into the um the Wetland area and kind of do what they want to to try you know I know they might have their um their reasons but to work in those areas it just doesn't make sense to me you know well if I may they they had an order of conditions they had a
permit from this Conservation Commission to do that work they F maybe Britney could speak to that or Ed could speak to that because it seems that it's so unusual it seems like it's it's um I don't understand how that was ever done and I
don't know if I'm at all comfortable personally as a member of this commission to um basically vote to okay that continued work um if that is part of the the issue here um so um again it
just that they they took over all of this area and back of their house and they say well a bamboo is coming in the fragm mies well I see a lot of properties around where the B where the fragma special is encroaching but I don't see people going and whacking it all down I
see people maybe submitting a plan to do some um some proper um control of that stuff you know on their property line or very near their property line but this to me is strikes me as being very egregious so we did order issue I guess
this board issued an order of conditions in 2017 for the work um it did expire in 2021 she did continue the work on the town property without a permit since 20121 to now it the the permit expired and but they continue to do the
work and correct me if I'm wrong but they shouldn't have that's correct and when this was issued in 2017 there wasn't a specific protocol for work on Town property there is now um so if the the purpose of this enforcement in order
was to to cover the old permit in order to reach compliance with the old permit with the plantings and the fence and the sign and get it closed out um if this board does not want to issue further allowances for the for them to continue
Management on this land that's outside of the contents of that enforcement order you can have them file a notice of intent and go through the process we have now which is just a form to request town to request to work on Town property um which goes to all the department
heads and gets signed off on in addition to the regular notice of intent um so it does seem like this proposal is a little beyond the enforcement order in which it would manage those invasive species and then plant but like you said it is Town property and it's conservation property
so it's up to the board whether or not you'd like to allow them to do that management and then plant or if you want them to file a notice of intent in order to do that work and then plant I see filing of a new notice of intent is almost like a review of this whole thing
right they bring It Forward again and it's reviewed and you said something about different town departments as well right yeah since it is on Town property um they would have to request to do work on the town property yeah yeah I mean personally I'm not real comfortable
allowing people to do work on private individuals to do work on Town property I think when you do that this is this is what you get um and we have absolutely we we really don't have any real control
over what what goes on or what what gets done and does not get done uh according to plan uh so I think I would just like for my my opinion would be to just to get it back put the sign up put the put the
fence up and leave it and and get it back so at least the original uh uh notice an original order whatever the conditions of that original order are met and then so just just the
planting that would be M David I know last time they they came in front of us I had said I might be okay with the bushes uh with the plantings but since then I've gone back to the property and I've also done more online look at what
we have on our on our site and I agree with you uh both both of you and maybe the other Commissioners that the fence should be up there because again and Britney just said this they were told in 2021 or so that they should
um put out the uh a fence and assign label of conservation land and they didn't do that and uh instead they continue to do what they're doing and I think that's a that's too bad that's going to cost them a lot of money but had they come to us to begin with it
wouldn't be like that so I have changed my direction and I want the board to know that I'll also say that I've uh had the same kind of thought process as you and I I do feel like uh you you've put in a
lot of effort to to create this planting plan and I I do appreciate that it does feel like it's moving into a whole another noi kind of level of of work and maintenance in you know 3
years of of Mowing and maintenance after the planting that I do think I want to see that original order closed finished and if they want to continue the work to submit another noi to
continue the maintenance um whether or not we'll approve that it will be in the noi it sounds like Ed's maybe a little iffy on allowing that kind of work but
um I I do want to see um the fence put in place and um kind of reassess I mean as far as a new notice of intent too I just I I want to be 100% I mean I think it's it's obvious but I
want to make sure I state it so that it nobody nobody can be uh be misled uh if you do file notice of intent I would not I probably would not I I mean I I I'm certainly willing to look at it but I am
not real enthused with the idea that I would likely approve work on the on the town property for that so I just want to be up front and honest with you about that uh Pat or Paul anybody else no
agree with you what has been said that the fence should go up along the property lines and I mean a fence I mean there there's a lot of options for the fence I mean it doesn't have to be a continuous um you know a continuous uh split rail
fence running from one end to the other I mean you could you could do alternating sections uh you can do Ballard you could do you know wooden just wooden uh wooden Ballers wooden 4x4 ballards that have strings strung or
rope strung strung along them so there are a variet iety of other ways of marking that uh that mitigation area without um without doing a solid split rail fence all the way
around and again it would just be a single rail fence not a it doesn't have to be a double rail fence we didn't make any step stipulation of that either so so then to clarify so we will withdraw our proposal for what we've what we've put forth we'll put in a
single rail fence um throughout the area on the property line to delineate the town property or an alternative An approved alternative I think I think single rail fence is probably the best um solution in this particular case um and then just allow the area to grow back in because it's I right now there's
a there's a fantastic herbaceous layer we've see skunk cabbage sensitive Fern um when I was introduced to this project it was in the late fall so there was not um a lot of opportunity to do an assessment of the araceous layer what we did see was clear um I do believe the
bamboo will move back in very quickly and the frag mes is already um colonizing the area so I believe all of that will quickly become um bamboo and frag mitees so at this point I would think that just leaving that and not doing anything additionally in that area
would be the way to um to manage it and if if the if no further management it seems to me that putting shrubs into the area and initially it was herbaceous um vegetation that was proposed um and that was planted it does seem that putting shrubs into the area are just it's
frankly it's going to be throwing away money um because it's just going to become reinfested with the bamboo and the fragm mies um but I think if that's the commission's position um we can certainly just put the split rail fence
in along the property line and um just allow what's let mother nature take its course I just do you want to make sure with the board that the enforcement order did state that all of the original requirements had to be met and that included planting the areas of lawn um
so are you saying you'd like for them to leave these areas of lawn as lawn or should they plant them whatever the first um permit was I I see what you're saying obviously management of the invasive species would be an improvement
but it's on toown property we're not willing to allow you to do that but in an effort to proove the area and meet the terms of the original order of conditions I would imagine that we don't want lawn on our town property where it never was Prior they planted the lawn is
that right so when they removed the invasive vegetation they did seed the lawn areas yes and did we allow that under the original order no they were they were intended on and that's got to come out we we're returning it back to
what the conditions of at the if if the order of conditions that were trying to close out it to plant grass there was no plan there was a literally a a mass GIS plan handwritten with um with plantings
uh plant mix drawn in here's what I would recommend if the commission feels comfortable with this we remove the existing turflon or we we soil condition we seed a met uh native grass and wild flower mix into the area where the
existing turflon has been maintained in mode up to the area where the split rail fence is on the property line and allow that just to fill in naturally unfortunately what's going to end up happening is the as soon as the mowing stops the frag mighties and the bamboo are going to start to March their way
landward um and that will happen um and that but the fence line will be maintained so that the property owners the carbonis can mow up to their property line where that fence will act as a bumper prevent them from mowing further and um and then the frag mes
will let infill um that area up to the fence line where they're going to be mowing so the mowing is the only thing that's preventing that fragment is there's a there's a solid line of fragm myties right now on um number 20 forgive me I forget which one's 14 and which
one's 20 um right at the slope where they're mowing it transitions right from where they're mowing to 100% fragm mites I'll say 99 I think there's a couple of Backus in there that they had planted previously and then the area that they most recently mowed has fragm mies
coming in and then there's clumps of bamboo regenerating um but so I just you know this is what's what will happen with this area so and that's why we were recommending mowing just to keep that frag Mes in bamboo at Bay until we could get something else established in the
area um but recognizing that this is Town property um no further management should take place on Town property that would be my recommendation is just to remove that existing um grass mix
and plant it with a um a seed mix of of um Native grasses and wild flowers we have a seed mix identified on our restoration plan I believe that is listed our Upland native grass and wildflower mix which would Comm which
would basically be um little blue stem U Mountain mint commero Aster butterfly milke weed Partridge pea um black Ed Susan um and some cool season grasses so some annual Ryan sheep
Fescue so I guess my question is if I if you don't do anything to to that planted the the grass area what's going to happen it's going to get Shaggy and frankly it's going to be it's going to be um I will say
probably aesthetically unappealing until the frag mes moves in so it will grow so it will grow and it will look like it will look like somebody forgot to mow their lawn so it will look weedy and and you know frankly I do think planting and doing a seed mix with a native grass and wild
flower mix will be at least aesthetically more pleasing um in the area and people will be feel less compelled to go in there with a string trimmer or something else which was one of the reasons why we were also proposing that dense layer of shrub
planting that's why we're putting the fence up with the sign says no I I understand I I've also been doing this for 15 years and I know human nature what it is and so that was one of the other reasons that we were proposing and I'm not saying it all that the carbonis intend to um violate so I I
don't want to put I'm not putting that out there I'm just saying in my experience people see this and they feel like we have to go clean it up um which was one just saying I don't know that I I don't know that I'm going to sit there and and expect somebody to spend another
considerable outlay of money to rip up lawn to put down a a an Upland Meadow mix or a grass mix that's only going to end up with fragm and bamboo grow growing
through it in 3 to five years yeah I know but that would be the least expensive frankly way and the most efficient way to do it the idea with the planting of the shrubs was that the um again in L of the fence and planting a dense um a dense area of shrubs along
the property line would be to um but again I I think you're right I think if we're not doing that in conjunction with uh with with management to get the wet Meadow reestablished I think it's a waste I think it's we're better off
seating and I I think we do need to do something I think the turf grass it's cool season I'm going to guess it does not look like a Fescue microclover mix to me so um I would say there's probably mostly Kentucky Blue Grass and some other cool season European pasture
grasses in there that will just grow in and look very Shaggy for lack of again Aesthetics is not a I know it's not of this board U and I just I I don't see I don't see the logic in making
somebody plant something that's just going to end up being in the exact same position in the exact same number of years just because do you see something wrong with that you we can give them that option if they'd like if you would
rather it be maintained if they really if they want to spend the money to do that I mean that's I I guess I would you know I would say I'm I'm just I do have one other comment um is that I think that I would prefer that the the three trees do still go in um because we did
lose a tree um within conservation jurisdiction that they removed without without permission so if they would be if the board would reconsider all the plantings to no plantings to just those trees because the trees yes I can I can
live with that too yes and they're they would go in at a size that you have in there one and a half yeah so they they'll go in at about they' be big enough to survive for a few years to get established before that fragm and bamboo gets in there do you think that they would
survive I there's two Below in there right now um so likely yes they would likely survive um the I perhaps put one of them a little bit more in the up land yeah so that that has a better chance of of establishing and surviving long
term so I think to sum up so yes fence fence goes in along the property line with the signs are similar plus a sign on each
property right okay so that's number one the option for removing Turf for Native mix and those three trees mhm well the trees are are yes we say we
definitely want the trees the option is to replace the either leave the the turf or uh remove it and replace it with the meadow or the Upland mix that you were specified it's their option
either or then the Three Trees by June 1st or fall yeah I think by June 1st would be good and I just want to clarify so that one I and I I think I might have missed this because that wasn't part of the um
the special conditions that weren't met in the original order of conditions so the tree um there was one tree removed so your requirement is 3 to one because it was it's just based on the size of the tree so it depends on the size of the tree let me just pull
up see special conditions sorry it's not on there I thought I put it in there um right so I that's why I was a little bit confused we were offering the trees more as part of the restoration not for
not as mitigation for anything so I just want to make sure if and tree replacement for the cedar that was removed it does I know it's kind of just put in there and tree replacement for the cedar okay would planting one Cedar in
the Upland area be a better long-term solution solution than planting trees in the Wetland that's being reinfested with the fragm mies I'm just curious um since they mowed all of the Woody material I know they're trying to remove I would like to see at least
one of the trees go back in the Wetland area okay yeah makes sense since it's kind of that empty do you care how many trees are in the Wetland and first Upland no I it can be a mix but I'd like to see
at least one of them in the Wetland okay I'm sorry but I just have one other question yeah I may on this plan on this you had this up a little while ago could you point out for me just so I
have a better idea where is the back property line of this of this property because I I I don't see it clearly on this it's covered in Plants this is the property line oh I okay all right uh I don't know you see
my hand I see the 35 feet from the salt marsh line at the dotted black line it's very close to that um I think if they show just the plan showing topography it's a little bit more clear essentially if you follow
the the line of the the shrubs that were the planting line that's that's essentially the the property line and so and so I don't want to make this more complicated it already is but so their
initial work was on this on this um um plan that I'm looking at the green and then there's pink in the back that was all cleared out by them in their initial work that's correct is that correct okay
and the and the fence that we're talking about is going to go along basically the edge of of that um of the property of the property line what we just determined to be the property line okay that's correct um and so when they cleared out that back area they did it
initially according to what they were allowed to do they went a little Beyond but we did allow them to manage some of town-owned land so did they do anything and they were talking about you know replanting and so on but we're saying
that now that's all grass you know and and that was planted by the owners right that's correct and um and so we're saying that we're going to just let that grow in correct we're not going to really put anything back
there even though they did remove a lot of things but they were able to do that they were given permission to do that right that's what Ed had suggested yeah so I just want to make clear the only thing that they removed was the invasive bamboo and the frag mitees that was what
was in that this area was 100% infested with with bamboo and frag mitees so that's what they were given permission to manage I got okay thank you Claren what you're going to
write yeah I guess I'll just revise the enforcement order to reflect our conversation be an amended order amended enforcement order enforcement order three trees by June 1st with at least one in the Wetland installed the fence or similar and signed on each property
as required by the original order and either allow all to grow in or replace just the turf area with the approved seed mix that you noted was there anything else that we needed to clarify from last meeting I
don't think so I think um you know I think the the question of the Coastal Bank then is a moot point at this at this time so we're not going to go further with any more surveying on the property um at additional expense I guess the only other thing is that if she does want to pursue this a notice of
intent would be required for management on town-owned property in addition to the request to work on town-owned property protocol I I think if it's if the consensus of the board is that they do not want any work on town-owned property um doing any further proposal
for restoration would be frankly a waste of time in money so i' rather just like leave it at that yeah at this point I mean if they want to do it they can they can certainly apply them they can't apply I'm just saying course no of course I understand they they can apply
they've got appe yeah they just have to make a decision about what they want to do with this and where they want to put their resources at this point understood okay uh so are we all good now we will be submitting a revised plan
showing the fence area um at the property line and removing any of the proposed plantings with the exception of the trees and potentially relocating um at least at least one of those trees into a more Upland area to give it a little bit of a fighting
chance so we're looking for a motion then to uh uh approve the an amended enforcement order uh and uh with the acceptance of a revised plan showing those
changes so move second all those in favor I opposed carries unanimously thank you all right thank you thank you all right uh next order of business other business approval of meeting
minutes for December 6th February 6th and February 20th and I can don't have a quorum for Fe for December 6th we do have the Quorum now no no we don't we don't so what that Quorum is
Jack that Quorum is Jack David Pat Paul so we need Jack yet okay so we can't do December 6 2024 February 6 2025 we're all good right I was not here except for Pat but that's okay we can vote on that
still did somebody no moved I saw it I'll second all right all those in favor I opposed carries ananymous that's for February 6 2025 and February 20th 2025 I don't think I was here no you
weren't there Paul was the only person not here right that's correct so for February 20th a motion so moved I'll second thank you all those in favor I opposed carries
unanimously still waiting on still waiting on December 6 um any other business not reasonably anticipated I have a question um when the person here from television Road Lane whatever said that the association's going to pump the
water off the street little we don't have an approved plan for that yet we've been in touch about it okay that's my question good thank you okay anything else I have a question P um
such as um on that issue with people did not show up oh how's how does that usually work if um so normally we always want to you don't want to just you would have every right
to hear it without a without a a representative but it just sort of sets yourself up for a reason to be a then so uh given the fact that it's a contentious U uh
project it's better to wait and see if you can't get the the um uh representative there uh but we have some other issues with that that we have to work out between now and then as well but that would that's the short
answer okay don't want an appeal all right uh anybody else Britney anything I have a couple announcements um on Tuesday at the select board meeting Ellie Tierney was recommended by the select board to be appointed to the
Conservation Commission um I haven't been in touch with her yet since it was very recently but we're going we'll work on getting her um approved sworn in all that she may not be here for the next meeting um because she just has to do all those trainings and get sworn in but
definitely by the one after that so hopefully we'll see her soon and our cleanup up day is been has been scheduled our annual community cleanup day will be on April 12th this year on Saturday come in the morning to to sign in and get your cleaning supplies um you
can sign up online if you're interested in coming is that all of my things that's it uh was anybody else I I did attend just to let you know I did attend Mac annual conference on Saturday anybody else there I was there I saw you you
were too far away de Britney did you see me do my my uh my acceptance I did you were you were in the crowd for that what so uh my former
administrator Darcy Carly was nominated and won the award for the uh conservation administrator of the year uh unfortunately she uh has just she has literally just retired and was on that
day was driving down to South Carolina to sign papers on a new house that they had bought down in in Myrtle Beach so wow uh so I had to I don't know why I had to stand up and say thank you but they do with the Oscars so well you would think right but stepped in you
know I mean there were other there were other organizations that did not show up I was like why why do I have to show up here but either way so we were we were there um we had a good
conference most importantly I got my Vernal pool Society t-shirts so cool that's always the important part right got to did you get one or did you where they out yeah see that's the rookie move you got to get in there right away the first thing in the morning that's the
first thing you got to hit next time I know for next time yeah before the breakfast bar before anything else you got to get in there for that all right so anything else if not getting good tickets to a rock concert yeah to get first in line if not would somebody like like to
make a motion to adjourn so moved is there a second second all those in favor I opposed carries unanimously We Stand adjourned