##VIDEO ID:Da9oYJ9A9Q0## there it is afternoon everybody this is the meeting of the wait that one's not on it looks like I don't they could hear me good evening everybody I wonder if you could hear me out there okay uh this is a meeting of the Y Conservation Commission uh Thursday September 19th 2024 and um I'm Paul Huggins I'm the vice chair and the very first time I've ever done this I want you all to be kind to me okay anyway um anyway this is the formally advis that as required by GL chapter 33a sections 18 to 25 and pursuant to chapter 20 of the acts of 2021 an active relatives the extending certain co9 measure that adopted during the state of emergency signed into law June 16 2021 as extended by chapter 2 of the acts of 2023 the armor Conservation Commission will hold a public meeting the date and time noted above the public is welcome to attend either in person or via the alternative Public Access provided on the notice of meeting available on the town of the arm's website having said that though um I first want to take just a second here to introduce a new member of our commission grad Bower who joined us tonight this first meeting we welcome him uh I'm glad to see somebody uh step forward and do this really interesting work so thank you that thanks for having me okay um okay the first item to review is uh SC 83 2431 a notice of intent um Woods whole group for great Island homeowners Associated thank you and with that I'm GNA recuse myself okay can you hear me is this on or I think he'll let us know if there's a problem all right and this is my uh yes Perfect all right uh my name is lesie Fields with the Woods Hole group um working with great Island Home Owners Association on this project also Brian Wall attorney wall is here representing the great Home Owners Association um I'm just going to jump right in and pick up where we left off with the last meeting um so we um heard from the Commissioners that you had concerns over that southern section of the geotex stle bags because we were really um unable to maintain sand cover over that section of of the geotextile bags so we've come back with a new design for that area um it's shown in the upper right hand corner there that crosssection it is a fiber roll array there are five fiber rolls 24 in in diameter um we will take the sand out of the geotextile bags and use that sort of between the road and the first two fiber rolls compact it there and um use it as a buffer between the edge of the road and the fiber rolls fiber rolls will be anchored in place using steel cables and duck Bell anchors that's a typical way of anchoring them in place and then um once they're in place them we'll cover them with sand restore the Dune and plant it with beach grass um a little bit on con schedule and construction access and resource area impacts so great Island homeowners association is planning to do this work to replace the geotextiles with the fiber rols this fall um they do hope to be able to beneficially reuse some sediment that's being dredged from the Sweet Water Creek project they'll use that for the sand cover on top of the fiber rolls that is a project that has been pered separately by you know the the proponents of the dredging project and they do have permission to bring the material from the dredging project side of the dring project across the Dune to Great Island Road so from there then they'll place it in the pull-offs and we'll use it to then place on top of the fiber rolls and also on the the um the end of that Northern section of the geotextiles where there there needs to be a little bit of cover added to that as well um construction access is shown in that upper right hand graph it's really essentially the same as what we did with the geotextiles so coming onto the beach from great Island Road in that little red hatched area and then working along you know from the beach to place the fiber rolls um so it's really identical to what we did before same with the resource area impacts so the fiber roll array is0 ft long um there will be impacts to 2031 sare ft of coastal Dune and 247 Square F feet of coastal Beach those impacts to the beach are primarily from construction access out on the seaward side of the fiber rolls um and all those areas were really previously impacted when we installed the geotextiles in terms of future work we are asking for permission to be able to maintain sand cover over the fiber rolls and the geotextile bag to the north with up to 290 cubic yards of sediment um twice annually that would be compatible sediment with what's you know compatible with what's on the beach right now um we are um proposing a monitoring program where that sand cover would be monitored by staff there at Great Island um regularly and then after storms woodel group will be out there monitoring and taking pictures um if we see the need for more sand cover we'll note that and we'll let the commission know about that and if there's any damaged geotextile bags we wanted you to know that um those will be taken out and replaced with something similar to the fiber rolls we're not going to put any new geotextile bags in there and um notices to the concom will be provided before we do any of this work so before we bring in any sand before we take out any geotex Styles or replace them with fiber rolls I did want to spend a couple minutes addressing the comments in that mass DMF letter that you got that Britney uh brought up uh last time they had a number of comments or recommendations that you guys could include in your in your conditions and um we are basically complying with all but two of those I just wanted to go through those and just sort of explain that to you so they were requesting a ton of your restriction for all work on the beach from I think May 1st to July 31st but we're really having a longer time of year restriction to protect the bird so ours goes from um um April April 1 April thank you April 1st to you know September one so it's what we're definitely complying with that um Tommy your restriction and then some that mass DMF wanted um we're also complying with the um Mass D's Beach nourishment guid lines and that you know we're using Beach compatible material to construct the dune and um we're monitoring and you know maintaining the the project as it's been built um we are as I talked about we are proposing to plant the dunes with beach grass so we have a planting and restoration plan for those Dunes I'm going to skip to the bottom too we're also um adhering to the the comment that says there's going to be no equipment in the interner tial zone we're not proposing any of that it's all going to be above the high tide line and we're going to make sure that when the contractors come if they are proposing any sort of refueling on site that they'll have containment materials there and supplies there in case there's a spill so those are the ones we're complying with the two in the middle having to do with pre and post construction yiel grass monitoring and modeling of cross Shore settlement transport um the DMF comment letter indicated that this project that we're proposing is quite similar to one that the commission saw back in 2021 which was the not of intent for that larger beach nourishment project between Fox Point and White Cedar Point Road and um I think that the projects are really not similar at all that was a project for 77,000 cubic yards of material to be placed on the Dune and the beach so much lower on the beach profile and here we're proposing a Max of about 4,100 cubic yards um a year all to be held in the dunes so we don't think there's the possibility of any sort of impact to the eelgrass um the project that were you know the north the north section of this um geotextiles at its closest is about 300 feet from the edge of the eelgrass that was mapped back in 2021 by the previous consultant um so given that big distance and the fact that we're not putting down anywhere near the 77,000 that was um that was proposed that other project you know I think that those two conditions or those two comments should not be applied to this project um this is just a list of sort of recommended conditions I can just go through this briefly um you know we're offering visual monitoring of the sandbags and the foll array on a monthly basis inspection after storms um with reports to the Conservation Commission along with photographs so that you can see you know what the site looks like um we're we're asking for authorization to keep those sand bags and fiber rolls covered with sand as I said up to 290 cubic yards of beach compatible material twice annually if necessary if not necessary we're not going to do it um as I said we're going to notify the Conservation Commission in advance of any of this work um we've got that time of year restriction for any work on the beach between March 1st and August 31st and again as I said you know if any of those geotextile bags become damaged we're not going to replace them with geotextiles it's going to be the fiber roll array um so that's really it for what we're proposing I did want to spend just like five minutes with two last slides to address some comments that we heard from the commission last time we were here and it has to do mainly with you know what we were hearing is that the commission was frustrated because great all and Home Owners Association um I guess hasn't been moving fast enough to help address these resiliency issues there's a perception of that yes yeah exactly a perception of it yeah um and I hopefully we sort of dispel that perception or address that perception with this graphic right here and what we did was we grouped the work into four different categories so the blue dots on the left all have to do with that larger beach nourishment project between Fox Point and White Cedar Point Road okay and so that those Consultants started that work I'm going to guess at the beginning of 2021 they filed an application with meepa in June of 2021 they were issued a certificate from meepa saying they did not need to do an eir in July of 2021 then they filed a ntice of intent with this committee or this board um in October of 2022 it did receive a denial then appealed it to De and received a superseding approval in July of 2023 at that point um the the great Allen homeowners stakeholders felt that they really learned a lot by going through the process of meepa and this notice of intent filing and one of the things they learned is that they really need to take a more holistic approach to finding a way to build resil resiliency for this this road and access to their homes um so not only do they need to look at you know how are they going to address erosion like that beach nourishment project was addressing erosion and damage of the road because of erosion but also flooding and not just flooding from net sound but really flooding from Lewis Bay so from the north and that's one thing that we found is that that's really the more significant source of flooding not from net sound but from Lewis Bay in the north and so you know they they just decided that they wanted to step back and take a more holistic approach to looking at the problem and building a plan for resiliency so they hired Woodle group in November of 2023 so now we're looking at the green dots off to the right so that was you know 10 months ago um they hired us and um we first of all completed our vulnerability assessment in April of this year and what that did was just looked at the roads and um provided the stakeholders you know maps showing probabilities of flooding and when they can expect flooding and what we were able to show them is that right now the roads are vulnerable to flooding during high tides and that that definitely gets worse as we move forward in time with sea level rise so by the time they're at uh 2030 and 2050 um they're going to have impacts from flooding on that road daily so we were able to demonstrate that to them and then by May of this year we presented a bunch of conceptual alternatives for addressing resiliency and we just issued the draft feasibility study to them in September and hope to be able to produce a final report in October in and amongst all that work on the feasibility study we had the storm the storms in December and January of last year um and we got the emergency certification putting in the bags and trying to protect the road and then fing this not as of intent so there really has been quite a lot of activity um I think one of the things that great Allen homeowners association has learned through the through the course of our work is just how vulnerable really that road and access point is they are committed to doing something because we've been able to demonstrate that it's a serious problem and it's it's coming soon um they really have no choice and they they've come to really understand that so that's been one of the benefits of doing the study I think um and then finally just this last sh slide here gives you a glimpse of some of the recommendations that we made in the feasibility study um this near-term solution it's one that we talked about last time we were here at the meeting and it's really um so for the next say one to five years and so what that is is essentially filing what we're calling a proactive notice of intent with this commission um for emergency roadway protection as needed based on the dune erosion so if we have dune erosion like we saw last winter in an area that that has a dune right now that's protecting the road then we're going to you know have hopefully an order of conditions in place where we can come in and install this fiber Rolla system that you're seeing tonight for the for the South section cover it with sand and plant it with Beach Grass um they would also stockpile some of these materials on site so that they would be able to you know Implement these Solutions right away and not have to worry about supply chain issues um and so that particular near-term solution is intended to protect the road from damage caused by erosion until this mid to long-term plan can be implemented so we're guessing one to five years and we're hoping to be able to file that notice of intent with this commission this fall and then the other recommendations were uh for Mid and long-term resiliency to raise sections of the road um to 4 and a half feet in ab88 and rebuild the bridge and then a second recommendation which was also to relocate the road further landward and Elevate sections of it to 7 and A2 ft in abd8 88 and also reconstruct the bridge um the the solution that they select will probably be a combination of those two you know U mid and long-term Solutions um but that's what we we've presented them with um and they are and will be in the next coming months as a group selecting you know what what path they want to move forward on um I'm going to remind the commission that it is a group of 43 homeowners and it takes a while to to make a decision a collective decision um everyone's got to contribute to the funding the projects either one of those mid to learn long-term projects are incredibly expensive you know millions of dollars tens of millions of dollars so they've got to figure out how to fund it and everyone's got to be on board with it again they're committed and they have no other choice and they know that so they are going to make a decision um once they make that decision about what to go forward with then it's got to be designed and permitted and constructed so we're estimating all that everything on that row right there is about a fiveyear process before um we can then sort of stop with this near-term um sort of emergency road protection solution so that's the plan moving forward and we wanted to sort of share a little bit of that with you so that you you know hopefully understand the difficulties and that they are moving forward and working together and and committed to to implementing some solutions here and I'll stop with that oh I don't have anything to add to that at this point okay thank you for that explanation tonight what I like to do is ask Britney first for some of her thoughts and then we're going to open up the discussion with the the commission um sure so in the application you had monthly sorry you had monitoring for late fall and early spring but in your presentation you said it would be monthly which is what I would recommend to the board if they decide to approve this is monthly monitoring during the winter storm season um just so you get a better idea of what's going on especially in our season of erosion um but the rest the early spring late fall monthly in the winter would be what I would recommend and I was wondering if you could Define more clearly if there was a threshold that you had in mind for when would be the time if a bag was damaged when would what's the threshold for damage that would warrant uh replacement with the fiber rolls yeah I mean um that's a good question um and it's when the bag is deteriorated enough to where it's not holding any sort of sand and it's sort of compromising the other bags next to it or um you know allowing damage to the road so past the point of where some geotextile material has been lost to the ocean yes yes so microplastics have already entered the ocean at the point where you're proposing to replace the bags with fiber holds um well hopefully not yeah I mean that was one thing that we had said in the previous uh I think presentation is that you know through this more frequent monitoring and I agree with what you're suggesting as far as the more frequent monitoring that um you know if we see that it's starting to deteriorate then we're going to you know we're going to move and we're going to remove it and we're going to uh pick up any sort of geotextiles that have entered the beach and and try to keep them out of the environment okay and my next question is since you're not proposing replacement with a similarly sized and shaped biodegradable material fiber rolls are sold in like 25 ft length foot lengths how are you proposing so if there's two damaged bags or one damaged bag what is the proposed in the northern section you mean yes in the in the section where you're not proposing to replace immediately yeah um I think we have to work through that a little bit so you know you can get them in 10 foot lengths so um I think that would be you know the the length we'd be sort of aiming Tobe the smallest length we'd be able to to work on um is it not more resilient to replace in the longer sections are more robust if you have is it not if you do longer lengths yes it is yeah yeah so I think the threshold should be pretty low then if the commission decides to approve this if there's a damaged bag or two that should initiate the full replacement for the fibral that because that means the other bags are experiencing and have experien the same amount of degradation or similar over time um where I think that would be good step so we're not having segmented portions of that bag array being replaced at different rates where the fiber rolls would be installed at one time and have maintenance and monitoring from that point on does that what do you feel about that um well the other section is 810 ft long and if we've got 25 foot length fiber rolls I think that you know it's entirely possible that you know we could see damage you know at an end or something and and I think that we could replace you know maybe 25 50 maybe 100 feet without having to replace the whole section of geotextiles and um still have it be effective okay I would hope that we wouldn't have to replace the whole 8810 ft with fiber rolls right away if we see damage you know in two or three bags I think we would need more once obviously if there's no damaged bags right now I think we would need a more clearly defined plan outlining the next steps for sectioning that out making a plan to section that out um because I don't know maybe quarters maybe fifths maybe but I think it should really be a substantial amount of that array being replaced at one time in order to get those geotextiles out of there as soon as possible if the commission decides to approve allowing them to stay um but I think that would be possible to submit later a more I was going to ask that okay a more concrete plan on sectioning that out that's all I had commission have a couple things um first of all I know that you guys came on after what I'm about to mention happened but um I think I want to be clear that part of my frustration I won't speak for everybody else in the commission is the time when somebody put it upon themselves to add the rocks and the and the cubic yards of sand without any permission from us and that was I don't know if they even showed up on your chart uh of your timeline but that's where my frustration comes from and then here we are I think I was that preco I mean that's was it no it wasn't pre-co were you here I was here it was on the was on the at least when they put the sand down maybe not the ra rocks that was like uh early late 2022 okay so I mean that's where my frustration comes from is is somebody doing that without any permission um we left it there because we felt that getting having to take the Rocks up would do more damage than leaving them there but I just want to make that clear um I do agree with Britney I don't really want to see any plastic make its way into the ocean um so I I think um anytime we start you start to see deterioration and we need to replace it um right away um oops um I think I had one more note um you gave us so I appreciate the fact you've given us uh what what could be a permanent solution um and hope that that moves along um and uh I guess that's it for now maybe I'll come back but okay thank you um I just wanted to say that I'm sorry oh I just wanted to mention I I read your the Commonwealth Mass on the um marine fisheries review and it states very much that it's a this review was for a temporary situation it said two years right in it it's already been almost a year so this wasn't for for a long-term solution it was two years it was in in in this um review and um I read about how why they felt about the Eel Grass and the uh study for the horseshoe crabs I mean it's um it's shows are called Hors shs so they're very important out there and they were just saying how how delicate they are to being covered with any type of sediment and with the amount of uh of sand you want to put on there twice a year for an indefinite period of five years is a lot of sand and I think those two studies should be done before um just as they recommended before we decide on that and that's um something I thought and also about the sand um how it's supposed to be modeled under the um Mass uh DP regulations I some of the sand that I see in the pictures doesn't look like the same color even of on the beaches so I don't know where you know with the sand you're getting from a dredging site if that is also going to be under those um regulations if somebody is looking at it and making a decision that it's good sand to use some dring materials aren't aren't the best they're just looking for places to put it I've seen that in other issues where we've had dredging materials and what are we going to put it around here have the dredge materials been analyzed um yes they have yes and so um they have been found to be compatible with what's on the beach um the material that we used before came from the Upland material we use most recently to cover the geotextiles came from the Upland um it did have a sort of a reddish color to it that's common from material from the Upland it does bleach out over time but in terms of its physical properties so grain size and distribution of grain sizes it was also compatible with what's on the beach now and a lot of that color has sort of uh Blended you know bleached out and it it it is a lot more similar in color to what's on the beach right now um one thing I'll say about the eelgrass um there was an eelgrass survey done by the previous consultants in 2021 um again we don't feel at Woods whole group that the amount of material we're putting on the beach is anywhere near the 77,000 cubic yards for the bigger Beach nourishment project where those conditions were required um we don't think there 's a risk of this material impacting that those eelgrass beds because of the the distance between um where we're working and the eelgrass that was mapped in 2021 um I think in terms of requiring us to go out and do an eelgrass survey now we're almost at the end of the the period in which we can do an eel grass survey because it starts to sesse and you can't you can't map it anymore until next say July August time frame and so um you know if we have to do something like that before we replace these bags or do any work in my opinion we're looking at another year before we could do anything um and um again I I just don't think that the scale of this project warrants um mapping the Eel Grass in that way because I don't think there's going to be an impact from this project on those Eel Grass beds that was written in 20 24 what they were saying so they saying maybe they had a different it might be a good middle ground for the board to recommend that an eel grass monitoring plan maybe once or twice during the life of your of this project would solidify that there are no impacts to the Eel Grass being found maybe the end of the fourth or fifth nourishment during the growing season um and at the end of the project or maybe just once but that's something for the board to consider as an option my mind well I think uh you seem to be writing pretty good plan you are going to replace all the South area Banks is that true correct and uh I think that what Dave and others have said I agree pretty much with the commissions of being able to gather around those statements and put them in the conditions um I wish there were a different way of coming up with some kind of pressure for your 40 yard owners I don't the price of the roads is really somewhat small compared to some other things in life um I think I really don't have any other comments have been covered yeah I was just interested also in that eass question that PA brought up and sounds like monitoring is a probably pretty good idea however that might might come together um at this time is there anybody in the audience who would like to contribute to this discussion or have a comment everybody anybody on Zoom I see none I guess we could make a uh can't tell what hand rais no I'm sorry I can't see the nameer how do okay there you go you unmute yourself Cheryl we have chery sorry you know that was for when you started the meeting it was still muted so I'm sorry okay that it was still there you could just identify yourself the record oh she's all I didn't hear you okay thank you Cheryl yep byebye okay I guess we're all set and we need a u let me make a motion I move to accept the plan with the special conditions we discussed monitoring and others lass what type how how often monitoring um monitoring monthly for the real grass monitor that's you can't do it till July you said so would be eligible in the summer for monitoring um so you can ask for annually or after two years at the end I don't know what monitoring real grass means you know what what work it entails does that a lot of work transex snorking it's a considerable amount of work it is um and especially if we're not putting that material down I don't see you know we're asking for you know up to 4,000 so why don't we monitor it this in summer of 2025 and then again in 2027 two years later to see if is it going to change oh sh you're not muted you're not muted there you go okay um yeah I think that would be reasonable okay thank you the graph will be monitored in 2025 and 27 okay and that's accept okay and and it was the other item having to do with um the replacement of the bags but a more um detailed plan would be needed to be provided for sections of replacement we provide that sort of after later all right perfect okay second how about the modeling of the migration of the sand to the the shell I mean excuse me to the um pushy crab area that was one of the recommendations too if we could monitor that that modeling was recommended for impacts to e grass um not so much for impacts the horseshoe crabs so the horseshoe crabs that's how I read it when I this horseshoe crabs are mitig impacts of horseshoe crabs are mitigated by just not working within the time of year when they're there that's not what this said it was saying if the sand covered the eggs there was a problem I read the the um review so time of your prescription should be observed to protect sensitive stages of horses you crabs from sediment disposal Beach fill could crush spawning eggs no nourishment or Beach construction should take place from May 1 to July 31st so implementing that time of year restriction would mitigate the impacts um to these organisms okay they provided the planting plan and the survey was for the eil grass and the modeling there is for impacts to Eel Grass that bullet right there where Britney's hand is and we're going to actually measure it for the for the you know per the condition that the board is getting ready to for e grass monitoring and I think just one I don't expect that you will find impacts for Eel Grass monitoring but if you do find negative impacts that some sort of management plan be created to nullify those negative impacts I don't think You' find any good a second would it be possible to add that uh an annual report come from the group to us on the progress so the monitoring yeah so it's my understanding that the monitoring reports in late fall and early spring would have some detail in them um and then presentation oh you want them to return to the board but are you talking about for the long-term solution right yeah okay I don't know if we can require that I think yeah looking for volunte they monitor if you know if they send what the progress is and their questions I'm surey will bring it to them see why we should make them come here they feel they want you're always welcome to but make okay we we have a motion a long motion have a second need to read the motion back or anything like that that do we understand the motion I think I understand it yeah okay yeah in favor motion it was opposed one 31 the motion passes that wasy all right thank you very much appreciate your time much for your time yeah thank you okay the next item is um contined request to amend order of condition 8323795396 that's correct it's October 3D October mov you jack second okay all in favor say I I no he's not in yet respectfully observing okay next is um Contin request to amend order of conditions 83 2386 sh Consulting for Joseph and Amell 8 Grand good evening Mark Burgess of shorefront Consulting representing uh the originally Ali but now the property belongs to Souza who are the son and daughter no worries um okay so when we were here before we had opposed a walkway in a patio and the mitigation to go with it the walkway was not well received and we heard you so that has been eliminated from the Revis plan the mitigation areas were updated accordingly for 3 to one for the uh new portion of the perious deck area that's about the changes really uh you can see the the uh revised planting list is part of the letter that I the revision letter and um they said again you have the revised plan and the mitigation areas are in the letter as well the ums Britney asked to clarify the table I hope I got that right close it's acceptable for now just for to note for the future if you have an existing it's it also would be included in proposed so if you have existing you know 319 ft of deck those those are there you're still proposing 319 you're not you're not putting what you're proposing to add you're putting the total proposed so for now this is fine but for the future that's what Ed's looking for existing proposed seeing it unchange that's what we're looking for but this part is great and there's a new way that we're plotting these so I hope they come out a lot clearer because they were kind of blurry and washed that's a drafting thing um that's that's really it we listened to you we deleted the the walkway did want me to state that the original reason for the walkway I was told or misunderstood that it was to prevent sand from getting in the house that's not a big deal his mother is occasionally in a wheelchair and he wanted a flat surface to get from the the patio to the dock Landing that landing area um so can cut the very short or whatever but he wanted just wanted to me to make that clarification for you other than that I I'm hope I readdressed everything and I'm address any questions you might have thank you for addressing the commission's questions that's all thanks welcome any questions from the commission the only thing I would ask is is it possible to put a a mat to pad that would help with the wheelchair I asked him I can ask you guys the question I asked him about using a Moby mat you know you know what those are right yeah and that's not a structure right he could just could he roll that out in the summertime and just roll it back in the winter or whatever nobody would would I don't see how it would help on a hard surface but if you wanted to do that that's fine good it's hard ground those usually are just to solidify the sand but that's what he wants that's fine yeah well if it rained and it was muddy that would help Traverse the area so I I did pose that idea with him we'll see but I'm glad that you're acceptable for that option thank you thank you ja anybody else anybody in the audience anybody on Zoom I have a motion to be to approve this project as was as proposed is fine as proposed isine d i unanimously thank you for your time you for your time welcome Mr power we haven't met you'll be seeing sure me soon to working with you thank you okay next request to amend order of conditions that's 83 d233 good evening Mr chairman Mr Vice chairman uh members for the record my name is Kieran Healey I'm a land surveyor with the BSC group we're here for an amended order of conditions at 4 mayfl terce um the work that was proposed was completed and there were a couple items out there that uh after walking the site with um Britney she felt that we should file an amended order conditions uh one of the biggest things is that at the side of the driveway we are proposing a drainage structure excuse me um there was one off from the driveway that was going straight down towards the um the river so we are um looking to put in a catch Basin capture any water that would run off that particular driveway um there is also a Stairway excuse me there was also a Stairway that was on the side of the building prior to construction that they removed to um get a machine in there to do the grading at the back of the site so we're looking to replace that stairway it was there this is kind of a almost the same location but not quite the same location so that's one of the reasons for the amended order conditions um on the U north side of the building there is a retaining wall that exists now um that was not permitted we're looking to confirm that wall and then there was small evidence of um erosion on the top of that wall so when I met with Britany out there we came up with a solution as to put in a small wall on top of that so um to reduce any chance of any further erosion in that area um because it has changed we originally had one to one mitigation out here because of these changes we've increased it to 1.5 to one for mitigation so um that and those plants have been uh the quantity of plants has been increased on the face of the plan um other than that I'd be glad to answer any questions you have just one other thing the uh the proposed dock is um almost true 91 we're not fully there yet we're down to one last portion with 91 so we hope to be starting the construction on the dock shortly but it's not part of this it have its own separate notice intent but as you can see the proposed locations on the plan just so everybody knows that we're we're on way with the permitting and almost finished with the permitting on on the dock other that be glad to answer any questions you have any um sure some um I did I did walk the site with Karen which was greatly appreciated um on the original approved plan the mitigation that was provided and approved was 2: one I think on the approved plans it says 2: one um but the disturbance The increased mitigation that you would be offering was would be for the excavation of the yard and the additional structures or just the new structures I tried to incorporate both the work that was done the work that was previously p and the work that was done now and come up with a new Square fo for editing okay that's what you have is a new square footage for editing okay I was under the impression that the original plan was approved at 2:1 but um either way I think there's like you said there's a lot of erosion in the yard implementing this drainage do you think that would eliminate the erosion on the site as it is right now the backyard has no vegetation I mean there's weeds but the the soil is loose it's to get ready to the plant and they were just waiting for this so that they could go back in and get everything squared away at one time so are they blanketing and seeding the slope here are they Hydro Seating or what kind of plan do they have for that they plan on seating I'm not sure if it's Hydro Seating seating but they do plan on I don't even know it's rolled out grass the stage but they do plan on getting that stable as quickly as they can okay but they they just wanted to get because they got to bring in a machine to dig out the um C Basin I think they just until all the machine work was done before they started planting okay yeah that silt fence is working hard it's collecting a lot of erosion sediment eroded sediment um if you're saying the original was approved one to one I mean I can I can try and pull the the first one up but that was my only comment why would you decrease it but if you're increasing it that is different the board can yeah I'm trying to find it while you guys discuss this is the original approved plan it say 2 to one okay I guess I'm going to be increasing the mitigation the 2 to one and that was an error by me for some reason I was looking at one to one may was in my head but um but we gladly increase that two to one to be consistent that would that would only be my request to be consistent with the original approved ratio um other than that and sorry one more question um are you proposing planting shrubs under the second wall to stabilize or just grass um you think either would work we haven't really discussed it it was I think it's going to be a case of when the wall is complete to see what's what's happening there the the area between the two walls is going to be about 2 ft wide so it's not going to be substantial but there's going to be a little bit of area there so we could we could plant that and uh as it's within the 50 Foot inre use own mitigation so obviously we need a lot more if we got to increase another um 25% of that area like that okay so can we approve this with the idea that uh we get a plan yes okay that's what I would recommend otherwise I have no questions okay anybody else have questions I forget though um the last thing he just did did Bradford sign that one no okay but he signs this one he can sign this one your first vote anything from the audience at all thank you members who who seconded that motion and missed it glwood street we have not received a d number yet for this project so we can't vote on it tonight okay if I could open you up for discussion and make presentation and then we'll wait the U the again for the record my name is Kier and he from the BC group representing the owners of the property Ron G rro um we had been in front of you with this project in the past and we had received approve of um some sand disposal in front of the wall between the wall and the and the ocean um that sand was eroded pretty quickly and uh the area behind the wall was also washed out so what we looking to is to uh raise the wall by three ft to um protect the property and to GR in sand at the back of the wall on the landwood side of the wall and then uh plant beach grass on that sand area to stabilize the whole whole area we're closing a additional wall further in towards the house and uh we're hoping to bring up the basically the whole area and to uh reduce the risk of flooding um but the primary job here is the uh raising of the seawood facing wall by 3 ft the disturbance will be on top basically of the existing wall um and the area right behind it where the current erosion is happening um we're also planing to uh repair and the existing wall there are a few areas where it's being damaged so it's a it's a loose stone wall so we're looking to um just fill in those gaps where erosion can further happen other than that i' be glad to answer any questions that you have okay I have a couple questions um when you're saying wall um do you mean increasing the height of the existing revetment yes okay rment wall revetment wall just making sure um the other portion of this project is that we have a wall here on the landward side and we're in the velocity flood zone um and our new regulations don't allow new structures within the velocity Zone um so what is the purpose of filling this area the structure itself is outside the velocity Zone still in the regular flood zone um but this is just a the yard right so why are we trying to prevent flooding in this portion of the parcel to prevent the if water comes over the wall that it won't come right now we have a slope that goes back down towards the house and the reason follow is just to level out the area so if any water tops over the house sorry if any water tops over the revised rment wall um but it's not going to drain straight down towards the house that's the the we just put in a flat area there so if any tops over it will settle in that sand as opposed to um float straight back towards the house and what if without the wall without the back wall would it would it provide the same function um it wouldn't work as well um to say it wouldn't work at all I I don't I think it would work in some way but um just being able to stabilize the edge of the sand and keep that area relatively flat is what we're trying to achieve if we don't have a wall there then we're going to need to have a slope at the back of the wall and slope it down towards the building which is what we're trying to avoid so under under our current regulations this would require a variance we don't know new structures which the stairs and wall would be new structure in the velocity Zone um so if you were just to repair and reink the revetment and increase the elevation you would still need to add some material behind it to support the wall is that correct yes yes definitely would these be new cobbles near the tide gate or they existing the existing Ones Still yeah those are those are all my comments but um this does require a variance and I would I would recommend not allowing a new structure within the velocity flood zone um and Phil is generally avoided in the velocity Zone except for Dune or Beach nourishment and since this is above a vment it wouldn't really be Dune or Beach nourishment um so I recognize that you would need a certain amount to support raising the elevation of the revetment um to provide support for that structure but anything additional I think would be also stretching our current regulations for the velocity flood zone those are all my questions okay so you said that is will be required you repeat that for for this for this back wall back and the stairs there because they're both located within the velocity flood zone I also said something about did you sayet the regulation well Phil um should generally be avoided in the velocity Zone um but some would be required to elevate the existing reatment the rest of it proposed for flood attenuation in this yard would not be consistent with our current regulations and you said that from the wall I didn't go out there I'm sorry but um the the slope goes down towards the from the wall yes if you um if you look at the section that's on the top left of the sheets oh if you could bring up there you can see the existing ground right there is so that the reason for the proposed grave was so that we would um if it was any wash over the wall that it wouldn't drain towards the house there is a low spot then it does go back up towards the house again but um depending on how that floods that was that's the reason for this flat area will is to stop the the water going straight toward the sound okay all right thank you yeah um why sand and not some plantings um it seems to me that the first time you have a wash over all that sand is going to make its way someplace and have to replace it yeah we have proposed sandfill Beach Grass area so the majority of the the majority of it is s is beach grass when I was out there I got the feeling where it says existing sand recreational Beach it's quite a large area to me you know there today is large yes we're cutting that in half basically by planting on the left and the right here so the the current the current area is very little beach grass so that uh hatched area is all uh sental with beach grass on top of it so we're reducing the overall area by about 50% where the crosshairs is right now the the hand if you will that's where the that's currently sand and that would be sand with beach grass is what we're proposing the middle still would be sand the middle would still be sand my question still stands I mean that sand still has to go somewhere if if it's roted which it will be with the with the area being flat and the beach grass adjacent to the wall there's going to be a lot less water coming over the top not it's still among same coming over the top but it will be less destructive because the beach is there and by adding three ft to the wall we're hoping to reduce the amount of water that comes over that's um I don't think I have any additional comments than what of what's already been said okay thank you well I think we're in a situation where we're trying to do something to get over the hump for the next five 10 years and we really should be planning for the next 50 but can't do really do much about that at this point um by that I mean you know raising walls a lot more than what we're even talking this place could be gone in really storm so if you have enough you can control your own anxieties about the possibility of large storms coming that's great um so I I really don't have any uh well the one thing I would suggest is probably more Beach Grass area like you're saying because even with that one little portion waves get in there they're going to disperse and spread out and just wipe up the beach grass that you have there so I don't know if there's a solution about that except for putting all beach grass in except for a path I kind of agree with um Britain in the fact that we just made these new regulations about not putting walls in the velocity Zone and this is a velocity Zone and um it's a beautiful spot and I understand you want to protect it but um I don't know just keep building walls higher and higher I I I I just it's going to it's going to direct the water around these walls to other to other areas and I just don't see see how we can just keep um paying no attention to what we do we just decided with the last regulations that we're not putting any walls in the velocity Zone and I think the plantings and um would help and and fixing the original wall out there it's going to add some protection to the area but the increasing in the size of the walls and the walls in the back I I don't can allow that I going to say I agree so you know where I'm coming from that question about you said something about the three foot increase in the wall one the U the existing wall in front yes so you raise it up 30 feet and then water still goes over in a storm right it still washes through that big area y still heading down here unless you get some kind of variance to inrease the all contain it on the other side right correct it's still going to wash through it still going to wash through but there will be a few things one is that by raising the wall three feet we expect to reduce the amount of water that's going to top the wall substantially that's the the primary focus of this is to raise that particular oneall um so that's a quick question would the tide gate do anything to take that water out well will that be by having the the secondary wall if you will um near the house that's going to you can see by the grading that we're developing the water towards the tide gate so if it does Flash over it's going to go in that direction would it still go that direction now because that's where the lowest point in the yard is I would suggest you need to not okay you need to think about CH putting a rock in re chinking that because that helps the return when you don't put that in that is proposed maintenance of the wall so that be turned down I'm sorry I don't understand your question I was saying that when you put in the stone small stones that uh hurts the ability to get returned water out of the yard that's true so what are we disallowing the changing we haven't discussed the thinking one wall at a time I guess so would it so you're Is it feasible to increase the elevation of the rment and still bring some fill on the side and have a gentler slope toward the existing low point in the yard would that be enough I guess you'd have to figure out how much you need horizontally in order to support a revetment of that size but I think that's what the board is leaning toward eliminating that back wall and stairs um I guess as we don't have a DVP number um let me go back to my client and see um and we'll have a look at this and if there are changes to be made to the plan I'll have them in before next Friday and if we don't if he wants to follow with this I'll come back and the DP number will be issued by then and we can discuss it further okay sound good thank you thank you any any comments from the AUD identify yourself for the record excuse me my name is John barer I'm at seven Glenwood Street which is next door to this I came in favor of this I still am in favor but I'm just curious to know where that wall is say which wall here is the the back of the house the sand area so this is the wall we're talking about the house I gu what would that be just wall it would be it would be W it's an interlocking wall Lo walls yes St yes I would have had any problem with that my wall my wall just wasn't aware of this I'm still in favor thank you back Ros I've known I've been here for 25 years is and uh I think they they've been in this property for about 15 and they absolutely do everything perect they're real First Class People the house is a beautiful home they maintain it as good as anybody in the neighborhood I I support them we thank you for your input anybody on Zoom good evening you identify yourself please yes uh hi my name is Chris Lai um I am a 22 Park a and I was asked by the High Park civic association to review the submission as I previously served on the Yarmouth conservation commission and I work in the coastal environmental field and I apologize that you're staring at um a lovely scene of of stormier days here um the goal of my review was to ensure that there were no adverse impacts to the already existing flooding concerns at the end of Glenwood um so I wanted to just uh kind of capture what I um reviewed on this plan and some of the concerns that we have so overall the plan States it's not for construction for permitting only there are several important designations were missing including no notations of types of wetland resource areas existing vegetative areas and species no flops indicated for the reatment size or type of material being used and where materials would be resourced from I'm working on the assumption that the area defined as the sand recreational Beach and proposed sandfill areas are being defined as land subject to Coastal storm Flowage as the documentation only notes that a coastal zone does not exist on this lot but the Coastal Bank is only located adjacent to the existing revetment also the plan submission included in the format that the house is at ae2 whever the plan itself refers to ve elevation of 13 and I couldn't find a lar uh a letter of map vision for this area so it'd be helpful to get some confirmation of the plan and the figures of the plan doesn't agree with the ferment that was provided for the rment wall the plan calls to increase the existing rment to 3 ft in elevation understandable homeowners like to protect their structure the concerns are as follows how is the elevation going to be achieved will Stones be stacked on top of the existing revetment cap will this make the wall much steeper and the stairs cl to be moved to accommodate the steepness or will there be a new engineered slope propose with the increased height neither the slopes the size of the material being brought in nor the stair run were indicated on the plan also the plan calls for reinking as needed the plan does not indicate the amount of chickening being proposed what stone will be used um and if we have what was done in the past from the Quarry then most likely those stones will get thrown out Cobble offers a more stability with a higher price and what is the minimum size of the stone I think we all know on the board and in the industry that chinking Stone reduces the ability of a revetment to break down wave energy which will cause more water to potentially overtop the new height structures that the wall is looking to um achieve if the wall doesn't have void then vetan will act more like a ramp for the water rather than um reducing the water intrusion with the velocity Zone being 13 or 12 according to the femo naaps the new plan is only calling for 11t elevation or up to 11 ft this means there'll still be significant wave over topping and that's only uh that's three feet of water overflowing the proposed I'm wondering what modeling was done to ensure this new proposed three foot height is appropriate rather than going higher for the lock wall I think most people have already commented on that but the proposed wall path Runway runs parallel to the water 35 ft of the 50 proposed foot wall run is within the 50 ft and where new hod structure is not allowed I'm assuming the purpose of the lock wall is to capture the water that overflows the newly elevated revetment but it's curious that the plan is also calling for an existing four to five feet of recreational Beach area to be graded at the same exact height as both walls which would create a completely flat surface for water to travel towards the dwelling which is not the purpose of the project the plan should also not the being provided will be compatible with existing material and the material will come from an um approved duckin Source if you're keeping the area flat you would rather need to um you could change your slope rather than bringing in 400 cubic yards of additional material for water drainage the plan refers to improvements in the storm water maintenance management of the site however with the placement of lock wall more water will be directed to the western boundary AKA Glenwood Street there are currently concerns about the flooding of the low end of the southern end of Glenwood with some suspicions that the water flows currently under the flood gate or through it as seen by the sand deposits on the road adjacent to the gate this area I wanted the Conservation Commission to know is currently under review by the Yarmouth Department of Public Works for solutions to existing flooding concerns and I would suggest that dwb consulted on this project to ensure that their review and current planning of Glenwood incorporates changes that are being suggested for this abing property for vegetation uh the plan refers to an enhancement of a vegetated areas there you'll see a reference to a planting plan looking at the plan there is a sole species suggested I'm assuming beach grass is a mopa having a variety of appropriate vegetation will incur a strong will ensure a stronger and more stable recreational area for the owner it's also more conducive to a wetland Diversified species recommendation and significantly more vegetation as one of the um one of the members just suggested as a pathway would do much better to protecting the dwelling than just keeping it all sand lastly um the stairwell to the home structure leading from the lock wall is understandable if the proposal for the you know currently land not committed lock wall to be proposed however I would strongly suggest that the stairs not be located in the same exact pathway as the stairs for the rment as it means it's a seamless conduct for water and I would want the owner to know that we'd want to have a a staggered um stairway system to reduce the water intrusion and I feel on the end that the commission as well as the homeowner deserves a more detailed and thoughtful plan okay thank you thank you going to be I'm GNA jump in first yeah um I think that person obviously is well versed in this type of thing and I'm sure she will um be interested in attending the um the next meeting when you discuss the new plan and I would suggest that um you get a copy of what she's talking if you'd like to put anything in writing and sub Britney and maybe be helpful to the whole project that would and know who she represents me know who she know who she represents yeah Park Association just to um taper your expectations Chris a lot of the things you're asking for are beyond the scope of our site plan requirements because we don't require construction plans um I would say couple of things that you pointed out especially are of interest to the board such as um plan for the stairs when you increase the wall on the ocean side um and the slope of the revetment which is sort of provided in this drawing but just having those out there um and any plans for repair of The Floodgate um but a lot of what you're asking is a little bit of an excess of what our site plan requirements are so a lot of your questions will not be able to be required to be answered um but thank you for your detailed comments and we appreciate it I think we're going for continu yeah we need a motion for continuance all in favor say I car unanimously thank you consideration okay next item is s83 2447 down engineering SC 75 Mass good evening for the record Danny Gonzalez professional engineer with down Cape engineering here on behalf of Scott mck and his project at 75 Massachusetts AV um there are two existing dwellings on this property right now we're proposing just work on the front dwelling we're going to lift that up put a new flood zone compliant Foundation under it as well as expand some um deck areas in the front and back of it we are in land subject to Coastal Stone flage uh female elevation 11 so the New Foundation will meet all the requirements and we are not proposing any fill at this time happy to answer any questions that you Havey the only thing that I had is that um to make sure to obviously it's required but flood vents in the foundation it said Foundation plan by others but we probably will just add that as a special condition given it's in the flood plane um and curious as to why they're choosing only to do one of the two dwellings I I don't know for sure but I suspect it's just kind of a financial phase cost phasing I'm just curious did we did we have something on this property years ago or is it I unable to answer that question so I'll answer it yes there was an order of conditions issued to raise both both of these dwellings and we will close that out prior to you know starting construction on this good that I can remember that D impr with myself um I see there's the proposed port and the proposed deck um both look like they're being expanded um from what was originally there I hav the map to know if it's um how much expansion but I was just wondering if there's any concern um about those additional Footprints beyond the the house so since this is just the flood plane um and the whole lot is developed they're they're replacing lawn right now um so in general um with usually with projects that they're increasing the foundation there's a lot of fill and that's what we're most concerned about that's when we require plantings and storm water um evaluations but since they're using stairs which we greatly appreciate instead of Phil um we don't have mitigation requirements for an increase in footprint and if it's just in the flood zone there's also no trees or anything present um if there're are a few trees present in the flood zone property we would ask that they replace trees that they're taking down for additional footprint but they're not so in this case it's okay thank you just that we include the flood v no everything good the audience anyone on Zoom okay can I have a motion to um approve this project with the condition of including this vents I guess is that correct second okay all in favor very much for your time thank you I'll try and put quick projects first next time sorry sometimes it's tough we have two certificates of compliance SE 83214 14 and 203 way and so they've requested a continuance so that one has requested a continuance okay requested continu we can have a motion to continue that so movve David Jack okay in favor passes by the requisite majority there second one is SE 83 2126 29 CR Circle anything on this this one is all set all set okay can I have a motion to issue the certificate of compliance is that second Pat all in favor I we have to sign that one right yes please too much fun right right thank you right along um continue storm water application this has completed the peer review process and is all set all set to do anything it's good to be issued the storm water permit we want to issue a storm water perm 7 28 so moved Jack got to split those two out yeah that was Jack okay do that all in favor unanimously well you signed that for Bradford's sake um we had administer the storm water management or the storm water management bylaw um and since none of us are Engineers we are allowed to hire outside Consultants to review all of the engineering and calculations that they provide for storm water management permits um so we've basically just waited until that process is complete and issue that permit um we review the plans but not the calculations because none of us are qualified to do that so that's what that vote was and that one does also needs signatures please okay is an enforcement 83214 great Island Ocean Club power lane roov violation of special conditions yes um so this was um reported by um in there was an order of conditions issued in 2017 I believe um s83 2148 for the re the re um Paving and expanding of the pow lane roadway in the great a great Island Ocean Club um two of the conditions in that project were to not increase the elevation of the roadway and to avoid causing flooding to the neighboring properties from storm water due to increasing the elevation um and the neighbor has reported flooding to her property due to the increased elevation of the roadway um and upon investigation we go out there and it does appear that the road is slightly elevated in some areas where they repaved it and so that would in effect be a violation of this order of conditions but we will require an as built plan to quantify those differences if they do exist because just by ey it does look like there's a small difference but we can't it's really difficult to tell um so we will will require an asilt plan and if they are in violation of these two conditions then we will have another hearing and discuss what steps they would take either bringing back probably bringing back the elevation of the permitted roadway they also have indicated the engineers um down cap they haven't um contracted with them yet but they've indicated they are about four to five months out from creating an asilt plan um so they may either need to seek other help for finding a surveyed plan or we'll have to wait for that plan until they're able to provide it can you say your name for the record McFarland McFarland and are you on the board of the president of the board okay thank you any questions um yeah because I don't I this is the first I'm hearing about um that area creating flooding and creating flooding or being um um elevated too high that the first heard anything like that so so here's the photo that we've received during flooding on the original approved plans the elevation of all of the surrounding driveways were the same as the elevation of the roadway um and it's clear in this photo that the elevation of the roadway is higher well that that's not part of this um this um what was done that is something that was done back in the 90s where when they um paid those roads pay bra um poers Lane so that has nothing to do with the of the road that was done in 2018 2018 was um on the other side it started at about um two Powers I in front of 12 Powers we started at for four feet expansion um around yeah it's on the and it tap down to zero just before the pool area the house that you showed is in front of the pool area um and that had flooded even before we had to expand the road we expanded the road is because um and in a lot of the area in that um in the community the front yards are have extended into the road um it's coming going back as far as when the when the community was developed back in the' 40s um and then when home owners started buying the properties and using them as their personal properties um no one really done anything they if your front yard ran into the road it it people did not really take uh offense with it but this one owner wanted his property back that was in the road so that's what um that's what started the issue of having to keep the road at a at a adequate width for two lanes two-way traffic so when he took back his Road um that was at I think it was 11 Powers um we had to be we had to was 12 feet in front of his house and it needed to be 16 and conservation um that is what they wanted it to be 16 so um the plans that we that ALC um did a engineering plan and came up with different plans um to expand it and that is what they came up with the to gradually go from four feet and each end tapered down um so that is where um that is what was done in 2018 um what is happening in front of 19 Powers um which is in front of the pool area that had had issues before that expansion um and um I think that started um was something that when in the 90s they paved the road and I think they I wasn't I wasn't um um on the board then but I think it it's from that it's probably what um started the well not started but cause maybe I don't know um um I don't know yeah so it is difficult but it was it started before that that expansion it was had nothing to do with that expansion that was done in 2018 the only thing that we we can do um this order of conditions is expired anyway and it does require the closing out with an asil plan in order so um that is required either way um to either prove that it is a violation or it is not um so we do need to see an as built plan as soon as you can I understand there are limit ation with the contractors but um this plan does show the elevation of the roadway um the same as the driveway as it was surveyed at 19 and so if that's the same as the asilt plan shows then we will take back our violation notice to you and close up the permit but if it's not we may need to have some additional discussions about next steps but the as built plan is our next step right for right now okay so that's the same thing has the order of conditions no the order of conditions is was the original permit um and it has since expired so you completed the work that's great before it expired so now it's expired so you can't do any additional work um but in order to close that out it need you need to file a request for certificate of compliance and that step requires the ad build plan which you need the engineer on board for okay cuz I'm this is you know where um he couldn't have come to to um help me understand this so I'm trying to get a feel of it because we were under oppression that we had to do the order of conditions we had to um we had to close that out and so they we got a a proposal from them to close that out and um it doesn't really say anything it says here review site plan um record order of conditions permit site visit instrument survey to update to current conditions as necessary draft as buil site plan that's it the as buil site plan and is goes along with the request for certificate of compliance okay so they're they're proposing what we need okay okay and they have let me know that they cannot do it in a an extremely timely manner um so we just need to see that as soon as they can provide okay okay so do you need a copy that of the um do you need a copy of this that would be great if you can email me or leave a copy I have extra okay okay great um so does the board have any other comments or questions it is an asil plan um we don't generally you don't have to take outside comment for enforcement hearings but you can if you'd like to outside com I don't anybody have an objection to anybody like to comment on this hi my name is El brale and I do live at 19 poers Lane and when they did this job in 20 it was December of 2018 um I went to this meeting when when they were first granted this condition and my understanding was they weren't going to come up as far as they did and I went out to the pave I was there when he started Paving and I said excuse me it was on Nome NJ Nome that was doing it I says I have concerns because he started Paving over the whole Road he goes you have good reason to be he goes believe me I'm going to do my best to try to keep the water out of your yard well last winter was nightmare I mean my septic system and my leeching field is in my driveway now this the water that was puddling in front of the house before the speed bump that's before my driveway it was just on the road it wasn't in the the neighbor's driveway all that water has been pushed into my yard and that's going down the opposite side of the where you see that gray that gray shaded in area it's on opposite side and it's coming down and in 2016 I had to put a drain at the foot of my driveway because they had paid not in the 90s they had paid I believe it was 2006 and then they did some more treatment they said they were fixing areas on the road they call it repairs in 2016 I had a company come in and put a drain system at the foot of my driveway because the association refused to put a I well I showed them I stood there I did a video when it rained I showed them how the they're pushing the water into my yard the response was we don't fix other people's property but they were pushing the water into my yard I had it surveyed um Mayo I think it was said it's three Ines above you you know they paved three inches above your driveway I I was the first one to build down there in 1990 I wasn't allowed to put my septic system in the Dooms I had no choice where I had to put it um but anyways that water now that's coming in it's coming in be it's like coming in before the drain because when the drain was put in they couldn't go all the way to the edge of my driveway because of utilities underneath the ground so I had that company come back out since all was flooding and he said we can't dig there because there's utilities there we can't extend your drain so it's it wasn't 1990 they've been Paving and they've been repairing the road several times raising that road and yes it's been it's been flooding but this is the worst this is like those pictures were just from what three three and a half four weeks ago um and this winter I know I live there year round I'm a resident here and this is ongoing and it's just it's a nightmare thank that so somebody just a question I have for you is that um so potentially because the road is higher than it's supposed to be contribut to this situation and and so the ASO plan will show you what was intended to go there as opposed to what is there it will show us what is there currently in comparison to this permitted plan it will show what is there yes you don't know if if if it was done improperly by purtue of that the asil plan will will show us if it has been done improperly which it does appear like she said that three or three Ines it is higher than the original roadway um I am not confident in my surveying by ey to require additional work be done based on my visualization of yes so that's why um I mean we can have them come back to a hearing in two months and have them reassess and put pressure on them to find another company do the asilt plan because if it is this big of a problem then maybe it does warrant you know them searching around trying to find someone who can do it sooner um because then there might need to be work done to resolve the situation I agree I think I was out there with you and it certainly looked higher yeah and uh with my new eyes I could see that even betterfly and um um and I think it's sad that the uh that the association isn't taking care of the problem I think I even think you should be here I think you should have taken care of the problem when it first arised and I think it was your property you'd want that to be done too rather than have it ruin your septic and your Leach me I think it's too bad that the association makes the stand it should I think it should fix it and I think you should fix it yesterday so I'm looking forward to the adill plan other I agree with so I did um what was issued was a violation notice requiring as built plan by last week um so we would have to vote um issuing an enforcement order revising the due date to be two months from now what reasonable next week I mean they they already told me that they're unavailable for four months so if we want an update associations unavailable no this surveyor surveyor so if we ask for an update in two months go ahead rad is that four to five months to be able to do the the survey or or have it completed that's a good question I don't remember that drastically changes the timeline um so clarification on that but I think a TW Monon update would be beneficial yeah if they can't come up five months how are we going to get somebody to do something in two months there are other all of the companies are all back log yeah I mean you can take um you can take measures now if you believe that it was it is different than permitted um or you can just provide an update in two months on the progress if they have a progress update okay if we um we do have we do have the um the engineering plans that were originally done before they expanded the road um and I know that it did it um it there's awful lot of areas in the community that floods awful lot because of where we are absolutely and um so I know that that flooded you know she would get water there a lot of people got water so we are trying to separate um try for our sake that we're just discussing whether or not this is a violation of the order of condition not whe whether or not you're causing flooding to your neighbors um that's the only way we can move forward on um enforcement is if you have a violation of our order of conditions or the wetlands bylaw and in this case the elevation was intended to remain the same and that's just what we're trying to figure out if the elevation of the roadway had changed had changed from from the 2018 order or it changed period I'm not that's what I'm trying to clarify from this plan if the if the elevations match what was permitted on this drawing or not okay so that had nothing to really do with the with the um the driveway and the roadway in her driveway because it it's not on that side but there was an area that over here that looked like it was repaved with or within or outside of the conditions of this permit and that's what we're trying to investigate there's like an area of new Pavement in this area in front of um 15 and 19 it's pretty clear to me that that was paid with what recently six months maybe or L of I don't have any way of showing you right now um but it's in this area behind direction is this you see the little hand and the speed bump on the side of the speed bump there's brand new pavement or newish looking pavement that is above the elevation of the existing roadway um but I don't think we really have any else to discuss at this time um just looking for an update well we'll issue a revised um enforcement order with a new same requirements but a check-in at the hearing in two months and what does that entail I'm just trying to make sure I understand so I can go back to the board and explain it to them so what does that in in actually it can be as simple as you coming back saying you pushed and you you shopped around for surveyors and no one is available sooner um or with a date where the survey will be available that you'll provide us okay because we already commission we already HED down okay if you could provide to start taking care of these problems with flooding is that what you're saying um yeah to to take care of this order of condition that we this one we've already hired them they did the they did the engineering and everything and we need any kind of um yeah just a vote to to revise the um issue of revised enforcement order so we need a vote to revise the um enforement order okay yes details that have to be in that as discussed second I'll second all in favor I I pass by the majority thank you very much for coming in if you could um we apologize for being what's between you apologize for being what's between you and your dinner tonight so sorry about that Not Unusual D is taking us all absolutely well he has I understand he has new eyes now he had some work done and I can start us up umit stuff um so this is 15 Webster you guys may remember 13 Webster um which is their neighbor to the direction I can't remember um but um 13 Webster in the past had um filled in their yard and put in an extensive gravel and Patio landscape which we then required and after the fact notice of intent for unpermitted work in the flood zone um which is similar to the situation we have at 15 Webster it appears that in last spring um there was unpermitted fill and a retaining wall constructed in the yard which is also still in the flood zone um and due to our current flood plane regulations that does require permitting um so you're issued a violation notice just requiring your attendance today um and what I would be recommending is that we issue an enforcement order requiring an after the fact notice of intent because this work that you've completed does require permitting with our board go ahead so first of all please accept my apologies for my lack of knowledge of regarding conservation and flood waters this is my first time living in a Coastal Community I came from Connecticut and farm country we had other worries about fertilizer and Fields at that time we purchased this home in the spring of 2022 I was unaware of any restrictions with my project it was purely a lack of knowledge on my behalf um I was simply trying to improve the property we have since uh that work was done um we've planted grass not only on ours but on the property below where that wall is to provide some absorption there as well um and we are looking to add some further plantings and of course at the board's request we certainly welcome any advice of what we could put on the property to help mitigate anything that may occur as a result of what we did um my only question is really is what can I I do to correct my mistake and learn more about conservation and flood zones as I'm a new resident in a Coastal Community here in Yarmouth I will say one good tactic is saving people like me for last because we learn a lot from from what just went on tonight so and I'm serious about that so I had no idea there I will tell you there was a wall and when I purchased a property it was old railroad ties um hollowed out falling apart um all I did was bring that out approximately 8 ft and fill it in what we did was we we removed a lot of trash and debris that was buried inside of that dirt so there piles of dirt it was just just weird terrain that was there so our goal was to improve the property and the surroundings and honestly our most of our neighbors have liked what we've done uh to 15 Webster Road since we purchased it again what is the recommendation for um just due to um structure the wall and fill in the flood plane just doesn't after the fact notice of intent be filed um and usually that takes three months to find a surveyor so that's what I would recommend the the filing deadline be and so for you it would just pretty much be the surveyor completing an as built plan and then providing any additional plantings on the plan um and any other work that you would want to permit and for us our flood plane regulations are um new and more than they used to be so having it's just a requirement that you have this work permitted so we can assess the impacts on the flood zone okay so help me understand did you write all that what do I need to I mean I need a surveyor to survey yeah so filing a notice of intent you would need um a surveyed site plan and that's pretty much the majority of the application is having a survey site plan and whoever completes that would help you through the notice of intent and represent you at a hearing I can probably go go back to uh holes and sons who works in the area to help me with that well they're not surve we need surve right who what are they they're landscapers they did the work no they probably can't help you with this then you ask if we needed a it was an existing who did you ask yeah okay I I did I was very specific in asking do we need a permit I mean I I've always permit so and they're like no you don't I'm like okay so um and then of course this commenced and number 13 happened um we spoke because we're Butters uh with that so um now we're here today um I my other question is how often do you remap do you the flood zones because I don't know if number 13 impacts what happens to the rest of the neighborhood with what they did in the past and most recently so FEMA remaps approximately every 10 to 15 years okay they the last map is from 2014 but there's no news on a new flp plane map because I thought it was it's 2014 because I put my addition on well it was 2014 I to think about it yeah we under the okay yeah just to clarify around the wall any any work on a wall that be an existing wall or new brand new one would need a permit in the you brought in Phil in the zone so that's one trigger bringing in Phill um Paving where there is not pavement currently that would be another trigger um or building a structure within the flood pane can sometimes be a trigger depending on what the structure is so if the structure is already there about three feet off of so you're you're triggered anyway you brought in Phil I gotta so you're changing the elevation and for any future the future I would just get in touch with the conservation will here's what we think you're doing what do you think honestly personally I didn't even think I think of the flood so flood zone so okay any recommendation on plantings is grass enough or I'm happy to send you recommendations and I can also send you um who often surveys plans that are sent to us not a recommendation of a person but people who file with the town often enough that they are sove theirs that exists nearby okay we need a motion for an enforcement order to be issued second thank you thank you very much I think Bradford should have his first motion framed being new on the board wouldn't you think thank you all have a great night many he doesn't know that got to learn to eat a late dinner an early dinner or a late dinner a the next um item meeting minutes September 5th 2024 I read the minutes they seem fine so I make a motion to accept second right yeah you were here on Zoom I made the changes that you asked two littlear changes okay and then um updates so hookup refunds yeah um did you give these out to they were in the packet yeah so okay so I received this from one of the uh State reps um Mr flig again he had mentioned at a meeting I was at that uh the new state budget had um had this section in it in which if you read it uh people will get uh a tax credit um I'm a little confused I'm actually meeting with him Saturday so I'm going to ask the question I'm little confused where it says shall be the actual cost of tax pay of $30,000 which is ever last and then it talks about a maximum of 18,000 so I'm not sure because I'm not a lawyer what all that means but I think the bottom line is um people who spend uh money will be able to um get a tax credit not to exceed $4,000 in any tax year so you would spend so I could do this easy math $116,000 you would get four years of $4,000 credit if you are um obviously paid taxes worth that much so in other words someone like me who is a te former teacher I don't pay a state tax because we don't get Social Security and my state tax bill is very little um and you too right and so I would get that very yeah so I would get back very little but I get back something but if you're you know someone who is who is moved down here and byford's age let's say um and he puts out $116,000 and certainly pay state tax he would get a $44,000 credit so it's it's for a prime prime primary um residence only so people who own the second house down here would not get the credit um I don't you know someone asked me at the commission meeting this is from when I was brought this to the uh Wastewater advisory Council someone asked about that and I said I just assume the state didn't want you to double dip you know because if if let's say you live in I eastern western Mass and you have to put a new septic in um just saw some cles of people who put new septics in so um but there is a credit and it's to me I think it's nice that we should know that I am working with the Wastewater people to get that word out I talked to two Selectmen over the last week and they're excited by this too and I know I'm meeting with Senator s and representative digs and representative plan again on Saturday at a different meeting I'm going to bring this up again I just wanted you guys to know yeah thank you that was good news personally okay um last item is a regulation up yes so our um bylaw that was approved at town meeting in the spring has been approved by the attorney general and so that means we need to post some regulations to support it and they are in the works youve pretty much mostly all review them except for Bradford so we'll get time to review them first um but we're hoping to have them posted next week for a three-week so the have them available online for three weeks before our next um the hopeful meeting that we'll have on o October 17th we we'll have a public hearing um during our regularly scheduled meeting hopefully it'll be a light day so we can have a good discussion on those regulations um to support our bylaw that's been approved I just have two other are there any comments about that before you make another comment about something else I want to say I went for one of um Britney's walks last week and it was excellent he was pretty well attended yes thank you good things about the previous walk which I go to um so I appreciate we all appreciate the work you put into that yeah our so we've had a new guided walk series by me um our first walk was at Sandy Pond we had 20 attendees and our second walk was at um Cilla Conservation Area there were 10 attendees and we're going to have one in the near future we're working um with the Historical Society to see if we can use their Trails um behind the post office in yarmouthport um but we're hoping to do one at calerie darling um but the parking is a limiting factor at our other conservation areas so we're working on other locations bus bus um but just two other quick announcements there is a walk through um at chasebrook Park at 10:00 a.m. on Monday to talk about the new park there um from it's from the library but um Karen Nate and I who are the Nate is the primary project manager he'll be walking us through the park um progress and plans and there's also on October Monday time Monday at 10: at chasebrook Park and then on October 4th um there is an environmental funding announcement so we we recently received a snap award which is the southeast New England program Watershed implementation Grant um for $434,000 for the chasebrook park project and we were selected to be the um the host for the award ceremony so two other areas in Massachusetts were awarded um for projects and representative Bill Keon will be joined by other federal state and local Partners to announce the funding that has been awarded and our project will be highlighted so that would be very exciting oh it's had 10 11:30 rain or shine October 4th that's all m is going to be spent on Chase to develop that Park yes so the money was awarded for all aspects of construction um relative Rel relevant to water quality improvement so it does exclude the construction of the pedestrian bridge so we are seeking additional funding through the CPC program the capital budget program um and the tourism um preservation fund and other state and federal grants the total budget for the or the bridge I can't remember David I think it's about $450,000 for just the bridge usually I try ask question the bridge is a large portion of the cost of the project so that's why we do still need to seek additional funding Bri um yeah 20 foot span okay anything else that's all thank you I have a couple things here I'm not sure we miss signing them want to check think answer I think we have to signer Webster we sign we did we need to sign and what about this other one is yes we need that we need that one as well that one we don't need that's a Contin you come over sign you that' be great thank you and so move second all in favor