27:25The primary focus of the meeting was the request for determination of applicability (RDA) for 5 Southern Boulevard, where the applicant, Mr. Bennett, proposed replacing existing stone and masonry retaining walls. The commission expressed concerns about the lack of a formal plan, with one member highlighting the difficulty of approving an RDA without measurable dimensions or a clear understanding of the project. Suggestions were made for Mason, the conservation agent, to meet with the property owner to install wood stakes or markers delineating the construction area to ensure documentation accurately reflects project details.

The discussion delved into specifics about the retaining wall, including whether it required a footing. Mason confirmed it would be bedded in crushed stone for drainage, a standard installation method. The proposed wall would match the existing structure’s height, considered important for safety, especially given the presence of grandchildren at the property. A motion to issue a negative finding for the project was introduced, contingent on the creation of a site plan sketch to be verified by the agent. Despite some initial hesitation from a commission member due to the absence of a plans, John Bennett, the applicant, eventually joined the discussion, providing dimensions and clarifying details about the proposed changes. After addressing all questions, the motion proceeded to a roll call vote.

21:21In other matters, the commission discussed the enforcement order for a property on Middle Road, where final inspection revealed additional violations, including tree removal and debris in wetland areas. Mason noted these issues had been addressed, with debris and trees removed, and the area showing signs of natural vegetation regrowth. However, the installation of a chain link fence in the buffer zone without prior presentation to the commission raised concerns about proper procedures. The commission debated whether to close the enforcement order, with Mason suggesting closure given the cleanup efforts. However, it was emphasized that full stabilization of the backyard was still needed before issuing a certificate of compliance. Ultimately, the commission voted to close the enforcement order, while considering the implications of relying solely on the certificate of compliance if further violations occur.

42:12The meeting also covered the review of another RDA for a property on Old Point Road, where the applicant proposed replacing an existing concrete patio with permeable pavers and adding a stone sitting wall, planting beds, and landscape lighting. Mason provided an overview, noting the removal of asphalt to accommodate the new patio. The commission emphasized the importance of clear documentation, requesting dimensions and native plant selections for the project. A motion to issue a negative finding was made, including conditions for documentation of dimensions and plant selections.

51:11Meanwhile, Camille Rodier’s presentation for updating a deck on Jackson Way included a discussion on the “50% rule” for fences, a state requirement for structures on dunes to allow sand migration. Camille raised questions about existing non-conforming fences, wondering if they were grandfathered or improperly constructed. The commission reiterated the importance of compliance with state requirements. After discussion, the commission voted in favor of Camille’s proposal, with a stipulation that the fence must adhere to the 50% openness requirement.

01:00:51The meeting concluded with discussions on meeting schedules and ongoing appeals. Proposed meeting dates for the summer aimed to ensure a quorum amidst expected member vacations. The commission also addressed appeals concerning 7 Marsh Avenue and 80 Northern Boulevard, with site visits scheduled and updates pending. Lastly, the discussion on Great Meadows Parking considered the need for a Request for Determination of Applicability (RDA) for potential maintenance work, reflecting on past lease conditions and the necessity for maintaining the area.