that's that's probably all right so we need to do roll call votes if I recuse myself do we have them we have a quum let's see we're I think we're on give money to us I I my new data is if they give M 104 yeah it doesn't to right so you can say that that's when they did it that that's welcome everybody to the regular state of meeting of the Yarmouth Conservation Commission today's date is Thursday July 18th 2024 this is the formally advised that is required by General law chapters 38 sections 18- 25 and pursu to chapter 20 of the acts of 2021 an act relative extending certain covid-19 measures adopted during the state of emergency signed into law on June 16th 2021 as extended by chapter 2 of the ACT 2023 the Yarmouth Conservation Commission will hold a public meeting at the date and time noted above 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 Yarmouth website and this is the meeting for uh Yarmouth conservation uh Thursday July 18th 2024 uh so let the record reflect that uh commissioner mhar is absent today and and uh commissioner Frost will be is is actually in Zoom land so uh we will be doing roll call bootes uh first order of business is a request for determination of applicability Hannah RIT just not Hannah standing there at the for those of you without a program uh for Don Caroll 49 Southshore Drive after the fact permitting for a deck in the velocity Zone flood zone and buffer zone to a coastal Beach K good evening Mr chairman good evening members for the record Kieran Healey I'm a lance Sur with the BSC group representing the owner of the property Mrs Don car um we were here before you a few months back to discuss this project uh work had started at the time on replacing the decks and the proper permits were not in place uh since the time we went and we received permits from the building apartment and um it was decided at the original meeting that would come back with a filing um for after the fact once everything was complete and um there was normal construction required at the site um it a little unusual in that the work had started because it had got destroyed in one of the storms and um once the uh once um Britney had got out there everything stopped and then it was we came in front of this board for discussion and it was agreed that we would go forward with the size ex proposed and um we would come back once everything was complete other than that i' be glad to answer the questions that the commission may have thank K questions from the commission this is just an overall replacement of of the deck as it was existed correct the de at the side of the building yes the the deck on the um closer to the street is a little bit larger and we had discussed that at the original meeting but remember turn your mic up so I can just point it more you thank you I'm sorry also um so what you said is that there's there was destruction in a storm and Britney came out and took a look at it and and gave an okay to go ahead is that what you said no um the owners had started work on the deck without discussing with Britany okay um Britany went out and saw it and put a stop work order on it oh yeah and as a result we came in front of this board about three months ago to discuss it we got permission to go forward and finish but with the understanding that as soon as it was complete we would do a filing so that there would be a plan on record of exactly what's there because that was questionable there was no good plan of the of the site at the time okay okay thank you anybody else sorry I'm do Carol don't need you sorry that's okay uh Finn anything anybody in the audience have any comments questions on this project anybody on Zoom nope right unless there any further conversation or question from the board would somebody like to make a motion for A2 and A3 move toid is there a second second all those in FA oh sorry nope don't do that uh Paul Huggins hi uh Ellie hi uh Rick hi uh David hi Jack hi and chair votes I carries unanimously six to zero all right so that's a that's a good thing for you that means you don't have to do any further filing with Conservation Commission all right so uh give it a couple days sometime middle of next week uh Finn will have the uh determination for you and then you be able to continue on okay thank you so much I appreciate it thank you thank you Mr chairman thank you members right next order of business is another request for determination of applicability for 71 Acres Avenue realy trust 71 Acres Avenue proposed 10x 26 foot addition and a deck expansion within land subject to Coastal storm blowage K good evening Mr chairman for the record again my name is Kieran hel land Sur with the BSC group representing the owner who is with me tonight at Janice O'Reilly um what we're looking to do is to um put an addition on the front of the building and to replace an enlarger wood deck on the side of the building um the only resource in this area is the flood zone um we did locate Wetlands to the um South but they are more than 140 ft away from any construction um again the only resource is the flood zone in this area um other than that it's a simple project and I'm glad to answer any questions you may have questions well sure Mr ke typically we don't hear um presentations when the site is not has not been Stak and it hadn't been staked when we were there on a Monday but because this is a flood zone I might look at it differently but just for your information for future going to make sure we State those projects thank you we had not been staking out alas in the past um so we always take out of intense the uh the RAS we typically hadn't been staking out we would gladly start doing so in the [Applause] future thank you anybody else then anybody in the audience have any comments questions on this one anybody on Zoom NOP uh then would somebody like to make a motion for a negative two so moved second let's see Huggins hi Lawrence hi Bishop hi Bernstein I uh Frost okay yes and chair votes I carries unanimously thank you Mr chairman thank you membersk you you [Music] Karen all right next order of businesses another request for determination of applicability uh this is Thomas uh and Linda Gru for 353 Weir Road is an after Thea permitting for a chicken Coupe and gravel driveway within the buffer zones to two vegetated Wetlands good evening um even afternoon um ly Hamlin here with Matt Gru we filed this RDA as part of an enforcement order mandate um just when we were when I was looking at the plan I realized that the um the items are not located on Matt's property but rather on Thomas Gru property so I just um completed the application accordingly so I notifi if the abuts to the proper um parcel and but it's all in relation to the enforcement order so I was here with you last time for the first enforcement order that involved The Cutting of the vegetation and the second one was issued for construction items and in that enforcement order um it was required to file an RDA for the chicken Coupe and the um gravel for the driveway so that's what we did and um I've been to the property several times and I went again and I'm amazed at how clean that chicken coop is and I included some photographs for you and so there is a management plan that the chicken waste never hits the ground it's removed daily and taken off site and composted in a contractor's yard the um gravel will simply stabilize the existing dirt driveway um and make it a little better than just Dr dirt and I think it's pretty straightforward so I'll try to answer your questions okay questions from the board I thought we asked them to move that trampoline out of the 35 this this site plan was just located um back months ago so everything is on it and the enforcement order was handled it's different items and the items for the RDA were the driveway and the chicken coop so the trampoline is a different item but so it has been it has been moved I'll have to defer no it has not been moved I'm happy to move it it's just it's built into the ground so it's flush so it's a little bit of a project I don't have time at the moment to do it but I'm happy to move it once I get through a busy season I thought that was I thought that was part of the discussion we had earlier yeah was to get everything out of the 35 I thought it wasn't above the ground it looks like it's like a pool I mean it's it's like the commercial ones that you bounce level with the ground yeah I can spin it out of there it's just going to be a little bit of a project to turn it turning it yep you're just going to move it out of 35 then okay anybody else just a a question about the chicken coop I kind of just for my information do you have to get a permit from the health department for a chicken CP or anything or an approval I don't believe so um just wonder I've had chickens myself and do maybe incorrectly I didn't pull a permit but I don't know I just was wondering okay thank you there there are regulations that that got it so I think you you may at least have to I don't know if there's a specific permit for it but I think you you are supposed to clear it because there are supposed to be I mean I don't think any of it applies here uh but I know there are it's more of a zoning issue because of the they don't want roosters okay at 4:00 in the morning 10 ft away from some the neighbor's yard that sort of thing but yeah I think it's lot size look into that I was out there and the chickens look very happy anyway so I like seeing a Happy Chicken I hate when there miserable chickens in a chicken coop all right happy chickens happy Commissioners all right needs to be happy too I I guess I do have something according to the notes it says check for completion of restoration plan things at site visit plan things were not completed they weren't complete um but I think those are a part of a different project as well they weren't a part of the RDA okay it's under the enforcement right yeah they're not complete I've sourced a bunch of it I've just been super busy we have a good portion of the planting that haven't been installed the heat the it's just been okay no problem all right nothing you said nothing all anybody in the audience on this one anybody in Zoom nope uh would somebody like to make a motion then uh for a negative3 so moved second second okay got it all right Paul hi Ellie hi Rick hi David hi Jack I chair votes I carries unanimously thank you thanks Lynn thank you could I ask a question sure is a anything I own the property 158 Pleasant Street and my son Michael was trying I think an extension on the dock is that on the dock one yes it is yeah yeah it's coming up uh towards the end yeah you still have you have three three more hearings between here and there okay make sure this all right next order of business is a continued notice of intent let's see for SC 832421 William Hearn 104 River Street proposed construction of appear with SE with season ramp not this one and Float within the riverfront area land under the ocean Coastal Bank land containing shellfish and land subject to Coastal storm Flowage good evening Mr chairman members for the record again my name is Kieran Healey I'm a land surveyor at the BSC group representing Dion who's with me tonight uh Billy H um we were here before you some months back and we discussed this project we had a peer ramp and float at that time um the commission were not inclined to approve that particular plan and we discussed the possibility of putting in a pier that would be fixed that would push it further back from the main channel of Bass River uh we were able to do so and to increase the setback to the channel to 19 1/2 ft um we were also able to push it so that it is 25 ft from the ab lat line to comply with the regulations um the relief we still need some relief for the uh the distance to the channel um they're 9 and 1/2 ft and we also need relief for uh distance to the windmill Beach we have 7 73 ft and we need 250 ft uh what we have done is um removed the pier and Float sorry remov the float portion of this and made it a fixed Pier um we are also proposing a sign on there to say that there are no motorized vessels um that sign will be positioned visible from the ocean of the river itself um we do have the depth at minus 3 ft where the bools will be tied up um Mr H is a sailor and that is his primary focus on this um he'd like a kayak rack and um to be able to dock his sailboat on this um we were at waterways we did show the revised plans um we did get approval from that board before we came here and other than that uh we' be glad to answer any questions that you may have uh questions from the board well I did bring this up uh at waterways as you all know that uh for our bylaws and putting in a new pier it has to be four feet straight out with no t or L at the end of it so you you'll be looking for relief for that plan here too good and um that wasn't clear to me in the bylaws that the uh that no no te was required but if that's the case and I'm misunderstood then I would it's something that we would look for relief for as well um we have reduced the size it is it is only 16 ft in in lint um the floats in this area we could have put in a 6 by 23 foot wide float a long float but um we're proposing a 16t fixed Pier which is pretty much the smallest that we can have out there but we have requested any any remake of a pier to be straight out four feet wide with nothing at the end of it and the in the any rebuilt or new docks which is why I stained at waterways yes just my input okay uh anybody else on the board no I I can barely hear with the with the air conditioning going on so it's it's nice when it stops uh Finn um no nothing too extra um there was two abutters that have uh said they have claims to the property um so I just wasn't sure if you have the proof that you'll be able to build the dock on this uh well we're we're complying with the town's regulation as far as the distance to the souly lot line um um if needed Tommy wall is here with us tonight to discuss that um if that's a concern for the board um but uh the biggest thing for us is that we're more than 75 ft from the abing duck to the South and we are 20 more than 25 ft to the property line to the South and that's all we can deal with with the commission is is the distances that the commission require is there anybody in the audience has any comments on this one Zoom just have one more yeah in the past we've denied an application that was uh within the the limitations of of the um public beach which I believe would apply to this one as well right and that's the very reason that we got rid of the motorized vessels and went with sailing only because the um there is a peer which is very important there is an existing dock between that beach and our property it's been there it's been there for 70 years that I can think of since I've been around but I I hear and has way before it pred predated the beach distance byw mhm it did it's there for 70 years there was no bylaws dealing with distances to beach 70 years ago indeed so that's the reason we felt with making this non-motorized and having it further back from the um Channel than the existing two would be beneficial to this area that um um we we heard the commission at the last meeting where they said that the peer was not acceptable because it was too close so we pulled it back and we got rid of the mized vessels which I would think is substantial okay any further discussion board from the board again I already asked the audience anybody on Zoom okay and Ja has his hand raised on oh Jack yeah I think by having that uh Pier closer to the public beach uh really negates the need for uh not having any further peers down even though they're within the 200 ft I um I guess I from some of the objections that I've I remember uh this is from my viewpoint a working River and I uh really um I'm not sure how those objections would apply in this case uh when they're talking about environmental and other uh problems that aesthetic and safety so um uh I think that uh I would uh propose that we let this go in I make a motion well I think there's an audience member hand ra as well uh any anybody else on [Music] Zoom I say Scott how how how' you I'm one of the butters that has um rights to the property how would that affect our rights who who are you again I'm Tina Mosa and you live at 109b River Street okay and I have an easement to the property with the rights to put a dock in as well no I don't I don't think you have the rights to put in a dock your easement says that you have have rights to use it use does no it doesn't no it doesn't it says I have the right to put in a a a a floating dock to put she the one that sent us the letter yeah two and there letters in the folder as well if you want yeah I read your letter and I read what your what Your deed said the way I read it and I I'll ask the rest of the Commissioners for their interpretation as well but the way I read it is that you have the right to use the area for boating for boating and for access to the water it does not give you the right to build a dock you don't own the property no I don't own the property but it does say I it says that you're allowed to use the dock no there because there's no dock I'm I'm allowed to put in a floating dock there is no dock there now see the letter yeah that's what we're here for no I understand that can I see the letter cuz we didn't get a copy uh folder it's these two and then do you have the copy of what they sent the theed and everything relevant to this application Mr chairman I don't think so that's what I'm saying iiv matter well that was my question is this relevant at at this time to this application well no not before the conservation I I don't think it is but that's not what you were asking me so that's not what we answered anybody else want to see the letters yeah I do I'll read it after you okay did you have any other questions on that one no all right anybody else on Zoom have any questions I see yes is it Scott is it Scott Scott Martin Mr Martin okay Scott I'm sorry I I can barely see what your name is okay um I'd spoken to you guys last time as well we do have the right to construct a peer if you look at the easements in detail okay Bill hearn's predecessor sto us the rights to put up a pier okay it there's nothing about using a pier it's the right to construct we have the rights to put boats there we've had this right since 1985 all right I'm sorry so that that's not that's not the way I read the the deed that you you sent us that's not how I read it I send you the deed why don't you read my easements that was sent to Finn okay it specifically details this in verbage that says we have the right to construct a pier and you're letting this guy take our rights away because if he puts up a pier that nullifies our rights because it none of the footage will count plus he's asking for variances that we don't need I'm disgusted in this whole process civil again I don't think this has any this is not Germaine to the to the decision the it sure is jine because it's ethical and moral okay if you guys let him go in and put a peer it nullifies something that we have paid for we have paid for this right from his predecessor and he's trying to get around it all right again this is not right again this has no place for the Conservation Commission if you have an AG a grievance against against somebody else you need to take it to court okay no it this is not okay do you have have you read the selectman's letter not the selectman we never got it well the selectman would sent the letter all right this has all sorts you you guys are putting you the town in a very litigious position okay okay because you you're allowing somebody to steal our right by giving them the rights to something the predecessor already sold all right thank you against it all right right thank you Mr chairman I'm willing to read to you what what it says it says together with the right to use that portion of the above described premises representing the extension of said 8 foot wide Eastman area southeasterly into Bass River as far as the Granger's ownership extends for the construction maintenance and use of a pier and Float yeah I think that just said it's a right to use but again it has nothing to do with us okay so okay thank you okay thank you uh Mr chairman sure um for the record Brian Wall I also represent the applicant U Mr Hearn and I was not going to talk unless it was raised by a Butters but since it has been I'll just very briefly say I have reviewed the easement and I want to clarify um one of the abutters said that they have the right to use the property but I just wanted to clarify the easement is an 8ot wide strip of land that runs along the bound line of Mr hearn's property and it does Grant the abutter rights to access to the water but I think it's important and I'm just going to emphasize what the commission I think has already concluded that property rights whether they have the right to build a dock or they don't have a right to build a dock um first of all it would be subject to your review anyway um it's not really before you the commission regulates activities within Wetland areas they don't decide property rights and I would respectfully point out too that in the the standard WPA form order of conditions General condition number two says and I'm going to paraphrase um the commission regulates activities it does not Grant property rights and it does not authorize injury to property and so the commission is not putting the town in a litigious Point uh position the commission is doing what it should do is to let private property rights be resolved by the parties or by the courts so again I just would respectfully submit that it's an entirely irrelevant issue thank you all right thank you attorney wall um can I just ask another yeah um what I'm having a hard time with is that end of the uh where the paer is uh t-shaped I guess I'd call it and uh what Ellie brought up I'm just want to be honest I'm having a hard time accepting that because I don't want to see other other peers other people coming and saying well you know we gave this paer and I'm wondering if there's a way a different um way to present that or or build that there uh there is um there are two options we would have less water so we wouldn't meet that regulation or we could go out a little bit further and then we would be a little bit closer to the channel this is kind of the already the best solution with the with the situation we have in this case um we cannot dredge so we cannot pull it back the commission changed the regulations so the dredging couldn't happen but um so if if that was the case we could have put in you know pull it back put in a pee on the float and met the distance to the channel met the distance to the subtly line and we still would be shot to the beach but we could improve it so this is kind of the the best situation and you know each individual property is unique um even though there are a lot of properties on the river like this there's none exactly like this so I don't think this would be a concern for a president because of the uniqueness of this particular site still doesn't solve the relationship with the public breach well that and the other docks that have asked to be rebuilt we've insisted on four feet and no nothing at the end except for maybe a little bump out for a seat not another 12 feet out that's what we've done in the past yeah I think the other thing too you have to worry I you know I I know I know people always talk about setting president but this is not setting President we look at each one of our applications as a unique application and we judge based on the merits and the particularities of that specific site so just because you do it here doesn't mean you have to give it uh to some some other place and if somebody bring that up that's exactly what I would say to them like we we do this as a we we look at each site on a on a site specific basis and we make the decision based on what the the conditions are at that site so I don't know if that makes your mind that's true but the the other which water waste I I don't think they approach that is that it's a it's a turning point in the river and a solid thing there makes it a little more intimidating to to driver around it it was specifically discussed at waterways it was specifically discussed and the waterways Commissioners besides yourself all voted in favor even though that was specifically discussed about that being a tning in the in the channel and they felt that because this was further back than the two ducks to the north and south and the fact that it was 90 ft from the main Channel was adequate for tuning I remember that so it was disgusted yeah I I I think I'd rather see it this way than that you know getting them to go further out and closer to the channel so that would be my [Music] own my own preference on that but well that's that's that's true but uh it it doesn't say any anywhere where we have to permit them to have a te or a float or anything on the end of that if you look farther to the north there is a stipulation that that dock will never have a float can never have a float on it so it doesn't guarantee that it's a special condition that you get something more than that that goes back to my whole point is that we we do this on each on a site specific basis that's why we that's why we look at it that way any further discussion along the board anybody else on zoom in the audience yeah J uh that's no that's Scott I'm no you Scott have you are are you g to add anything to this that you haven't already said you're muted we have can you hear me now yeah yeah okay there's a penny application for a pier on 103 as well as one 10 already in the works there's a second application for that same place or up here and one that does not need the V one that does not need the variances that bill FN is asking for okay I we we're not here to discuss other possible filings we're discussing 104 okay do you have anything further to say on that but you haven't already added unless there's any further discussion among the board then would somebody like to make a motion to approve the project with special conditions no move I did Paul is there a second I'll second it was that Jack yeah yeah all right uh Paul hi Ellie nay Rick nay David I jack I and chair votes I carries 4 to two thank you Mr chairman thank you members thank you very much members thank you Mr chairman thanks for thank you what I'm telling you I'm done this is my last night wait wait till Jonathan Wood's the lawsuit comes guys just wait Jonathan wood will be here with a lawsuit before he knew it I'm just telling you vot the way to vot the go and we can't worry about will be there with a lawsuit in a second um you don't sign the say no all right next order of business is another continued notice of intent for SE 8324315835 [Applause] into one new structure elevated above the velocity Zone uh and a new on-site septic system um some revisions since the last time uh we were before you we've set a monitoring well at the property just to to to double check that groundwater elevation um and we've gotten rid of that adjustment based on the the tital influence of the groundwater and that has allowed us to in conjunction with the microfast Innovative alternative nitrogen reducing septic system bring that septic system below grade so we've gotten rid of that retaining wall uh that that was a big contentious issue on the last meeting so uh we're getting rid of everything on the site that is that is at grade uh the only thing will be the the pile supporting the house everything's going to be elevated up above that flood zone or down below grade in in the ground um so those are the major changes since since the last time and I'm happy to answer any other questions the commission has okay thank you uh questions from the board yep I have one you could you review what you're doing with the septic again you kind of yeah so it's we've added uh a microfast component which is a nitrogen reducing septic tank so there's going to be a a septic tank with with a blower in there um to to reduce the nitrogen in the effluent and then a a below grade pump chamber and we're pressure dosing that septic field so the discussion last time was about whether you should have a Clos system I think or tight tank a tight tank so that the language is is the tight tank is an absolute Last Resort if if an on-site septic system is not feasible okay anybody else how often will the uh ground monitoring be done um so so we're we went out and and checked the monitoring well multiple times um and we're actually using a high groundwater elevation that that is above what we observed in the field um so I mean we're not planning on any continuing monitoring of of the groundwater table once the septics installed but it it is 3et above uh you know the high high water level high water okay I have no further questions uh and just the only thing I I you you've done what we've asked you to do I think that's that is the case I would like to see a special condition that's added that um all past and uh present mitigation areas that are needed uh be planted first before any any further construction goes and have a conservation agent uh inspect that uh Finn do you have anything um no that covers at all all right anybody in the audience I have one up here just go up to the up to the podium state your name and where you live and uh your comments yes good evening uh my name is Victoria dmas I'm an attorney with sunny and Associates I'm following up um to Chris senny uh uh his uh submission letter submission um that that you all should have um and we represent Kathy and Victor centopani at 5 Mala Road um very quickly U there were four requests that we made uh Chris made in the letter and um the good news is we have coordinated with the applicants Council and we are in agreement that um the four conditions are acceptable um regarding the condition um that the uh septic should be removed within one year of connection to the municipal sewer system um I think um that's just being tweaked such that if the Conservation Commission at that time and the Board of Health agrees that it could be retained um then that would be acceptable um but we would like those conditions to be reflected on the record we are in agreement and then the only other thing of concern is um whether the commission could consider if possible um the fact that there has been erosion um impacting uh malfy Road Beach and we don't know if the existing retaining wall can be fortified in some way to help um with that with that issue and that would be the the only request um that we would ask you to consider thank you any questions get rid of the retaining I mean as far as the wall goes that's that's not before this as part of this project so we can't certainly can't uh Vote or or work on that one but okay all right anybody [Applause] else Sindy Dorne I'm at for for Alfa Road um my only question there's a couple of them but my question was the wall that Anthony has put in I know that the Conservation Commission said that there would have to be some sort of materials or plantings on the water side of that wall is that anything to do with this proceeding tonight and um I I think that was supposed to have been part of the wall that was when it was originally put in that that was all part of that and um besides that what Anthony has done and what I have done to try to shore up our our beaches which is we both are between malfa Road the town way to water so we both are doing what we have to do to help but unfortunately the Yarmouth Town doesn't help us with that town weight of water in between us so no matter what Anthony does to shore up his you know we're still getting I mean during that storm in last December I lost a lot of my Dune that I had made and it has put sand some sand in in that malfa road area but the town had said up two years ago now that they would be bringing sand in there and I just wonder what their obligation is to kind of keep our beaches short up there again so that that doesn't come before as part of this this hearing okay okay uh for your who would I talk to concerning that W je Jeff Colby at DPW okay okay okay they they're the ones who would be taken care of any uh uh any of the the road uh water road yeah way to Waters and Road roads to the water that way uh and also um uh bill bonetti over at Natural Resources okay now naal resources would also take of what whatever materials that Anthony has put in front of his property as well has um some of the nourishment for the long-term nourishment I think this is one of the areas where they were well there I I seem to recall there was some sort of stipulation when they put in the seaw wall and it has eroded quite a bit but I we'd have to look it up I think there was some sort of stipulation about but I would certainly uh bring that question up to Bill uh so I would talk to them and then whatever Anthony does in front of his wall to Shore that area up that's through the natural resources as well no I mean oversees that well if if he's proposing things that's you know he is the one who's for in front of his it's only on his property just as you whatever work you do you are limited to whatever is on your property okay so that whatever he does is is overseen by the natural resources is that correct no anything that he's doing in terms of uh resource uh Wetland resource alterations would come before conservation okay so you would check what he's done in front of the wall before right okay and that just goes after and then as far as the planting you you're talking about the plantings and everything that's one of the special conditions that we're going to put into into this permit is to make sure that all of the plantings both in the that were supposed to be done in the past and the ones that are are needed coming up are all done first before they do any other before they do any other work you give the specifics of what sand or whatever has to be put in front of that or you no it's according to the plan so there's no there's no nourishment as part of that okay so and if I want to talk to anyone about malfa road then that would be the natural resour ppw yeah okay thank you ever so much okay yep anybody else in the audience anybody on Zoom I see is that Cath Kath Kathy yeah uh Kathy you muted unmute yourself still muted Kathy you need to unmute yourself can you hear me now yeah there you go okay this is uh Victor at the panty Kathy's husband and um my concern is is that the I know the the demands were made to to do plantings in front of the retaining wall but it seems like the time goes on and on and on like everything else over there at that at that property and nothing really seems to get done um since he was required to do the plan things there's been it's been couple years and it just keeps eroding more and more and I don't know what it's what it's going to take now or what needs to be done in front of that wall but um there's not much there to plan anything on so I'd like to know um what the re requirements are going to be to for him to be able to plant anything on that side of the wall because there's nothing there now but Rock and water well once again uh we are requiring that they do they they carry out the planting that was required under the previous uh permitting as well as the one that's coming up for that we're that we're currently speaking with so they need to have all of that done before any other work is Con is conveyed or started so they they can't do any other work on the on the property until they get the planting done and it gets signed off by the conservation administrator or agent okay but um I thought there was a time on the on the planting should you mean in the planting was time want it time on a plas the past not the yeah they're still they're still active that's what is that what you're asking is is it an active permit are you asking that whether um what the time limit was when they were supposed to have the first planting done yes has the time for that request expired dead so just just to clarify a bit here the the ocean side of that wall I believe that that permit and again this is a separate SE number but when it eroded we were going to put some rocks in front of that wall and the plantings were on the house side of the wall and those Beach Rose plantings have been installed by the way um so those plantings under the separate permit have have been put in place and as Ed has has stated all of the proposed plantings for this project and other orders on the property will be carried out before any construction occurs and that's still a valid or order of conditions for the for the previous one correct I believe so if if not we will we'll extend it and and that that'll be a separate issue before the board okay all right anybody else on Zoom yeah I I still I'm not quite clear or satisfied with with the answer here because the erosion just keeps keeps you groing and you know you people are the um conservation and I thought the purpose of the conservation was to conserve the the land there I mean or conserve the the resource there I mean it just continues to erode and it's like everything else there nothing gets done you know and it goes on and on we've been looking at that place for 20 years it's an isore and everything gets done half asked um it you know the plan things that were just put in I don't know if the commissioner was out there to look at them but they're pretty sad looking um I don't know if that meets your requirements or not but if that's the way it's going to be I hate to see what's going to be put in on the road on the water side of the wall because nothing's going to nothing's going to excuse me is this the owner is this the owner if it doesn't have if it doesn't have substantial soil to grow into so what I'm wondering is what do they need to do to make a base um and when does that have to be done by if he never decides to rebuild the house then is the commission okay we just letting it any road definitely no and so what's going to happen is that sooner or later e either way he has to file or has to request what's called a certificate of compliance at that time there is going to be an inspection if he doesn't meet uh the the conditions for the for the uh certificate inspection he won't get the certificate it will stay out and the and the commission will then uh Force the the um you know you need to you need to mute yourself because we get we're getting terrible feedback you go thank you uh so once he applies for the COC the certificate of compliance uh he will need to be if he hasn't if anything is lacking or deficient he will have to bring those up to up to uh into compliance before he is issued a certificate of compliance which would remove it from his title okay the so yes there are there are checks and checks and balance there are checks and balances on that all right so I I think we've answered that question yeah that's under a different SE number all right anybody else on Zoom anybody else on Zoom no anybody else in the audience would somebody like to make a motion to issue uh the um the permit with special conditions uh paying particularly attention to the mitigation planting for previous and current uh projects we have dates for those well they got three years for this one and whatever is the the remnant of the the previous one so you know what the dates are for the previous I can't pull it up here um but it would be in the folder and then can we also add a special condition for a split rail fence oh yes sorry I mean he's got three years to to do the project so he can't do anything before he does the planting it doesn't matter what planting he's doing he needs to get all of that planting done before he can do anything else so uh at if at the time I mean again we'll have a we'll have a a condition that requires him to uh file for certificate compliance as well as the same as with the with the previous um with the previous uh order and so if he hasn't done that then we can issue an enforcement order to compel him to do that so at which time we would then it would also cover the the planting again I have a question for Finn where would the split rail fence be on the special condition it says only a split rail fence to be placed is that along the road um wherever they were adding the fence on the property I can't see the plan at I think it was long the road it was okay get it I'm not picking it up right now Craig where where is that there's just a small section of fence uh along the malfa road layout and and the northern property line all right so and again you're with a split rail there okay is there a motion to that effect so moved second that Jack thank you uh Paul hi Ellie hi Rick hi hi uh David Jack I chair votes I carries unanimously thank you very much thank you where are we now [Music] Grand is he not here again yeah it's us I we'll be all right no no see that's what I'm saying I don't think you will CU I'm pretty sure that you told him last time that he had to present yeah he had to present in person yes sure pretty quick may I speak to the board please no Roy you may not you I I flew there at the last meeting across the country just so I could be there and there was a clerical on my um assistance half that she didn't turn the plan in and I wasn't notified that night so I had every intention of being there per your last request I worked a construction job okay in Texas that I have to be at most of the time so I had actually traveled all the way across the country just to be at your meeting and found out even though it was just a minor change in the plan that I was not allowed to attend so I had to continue and I there's nothing I can do about it um but I did make the I I was there I talked to the agent the agent basically said no you can't go and you know that's where I ended up um and I believe that is an extenuating circumstance with a minor change in the plan uh we request that um you do hear it and I'm available right here and I apologize again but I did I was there so I'm sorry Roy I mean you were told that you need to show up for these for these hearings did show up I was there tonight are you I was called like a half an hour before the meeting or or earlier that day saying you know we never got the plan and you know just that day and it was my understanding that it was turned in my assistant said she turned it in but she had forgotten and there's you know that's the extenda circumstance I had every intention of being there if you can't if you don't want to hear it then we'll request if you you know you're going to not do that I'll be there for the next one um Mr apologize so I'm I'm looking at the board yeah I have a question okay you know I know I know what we've requested in terms of people being here um is you know it seems to me to be reasonable that sometimes it's not going to be feasible for a representative be here um and so is there any vehicle that we have or any um a process we have to allow um a um a remedy to this kind of situation number one secondly um the gentleman says he can represent himself isn't is that not allowed to represent himself or his own project if well for question number one a continuance is allow you know what we allow for if they can't show up question number two it's up to the clients really to if they want to do it that way if what we can't deny them no I I wouldn't think so it's just my all right you you really want to go forward with this I I do I think um last time we were here there was only a few items that we were supposed to fix and they've been fixed and I and I understand it pretty well um if it's okay with you I'd love to try because for us to keep you know having these means is expensive for my wife and I yeah I know it's like it's too I'm stuck between a rock and a hard play so if you don't mind I'd love to try all right let me read it into the into the record this another continued notice of intent for SE [Music] 8324315835 are acting as their applicant and would you like to make any other statement at this point 200 ft uh thank you for having us um I think so last time we were here uh the board had asked us to take all of our plants the mitigation plants and keep them within the 35 foot buffer which we've done um and we're asked to move our shed that was within the 35 foot buffer out of it uh which we've done as well um and we asked for a flag pole which is on the plan now as well uh but that was pretty much it it wasn't um it was species oh yeah we were also asked to add an additional species of uh mitigation plant which we' added uh two additional ones so now there's four I think we covered all the bases yeah I think the only thing I see and it's still it's still a little outstanding is that uh I still see plants going up along the the side and not fully into the 35 so well those are additional plants so your the mitigation is completely uh contained within the 35t those are plants that I asked Roy put in place for me because I figured it I'd do it now because I want to plant along that side and I figured I'd show it on this plan but the mitigation is all within the uh the 35t buffer it'll propose mitigation is 1500t I think we're over 3 thou over 3,000 mitigation planting area yeah there's a chart there it says 3,15 Square F feet total mitigation with Native PL is [Music] 3700 yeah that would be the overall total and I think within the 35 foot buff was 3 surrounding total area of 35 is 315 yeah they're offering total of 3700 I think that includes the sides the line above surrounding total area in the 0 to 35 is 3,000 so you're still 700t short no no I we're 70 ft over so we need a total of 3,000 cuz we have 1,500 ft proposed work a little so we need 3,000 and we did 372 35 buffal I don't know if I can go back those those numbers are correct I it says on here 315 I'm sorry yeah 315 yeah sorry I don't have my glasses it says total mitigation with Native planting is 3,765 so is that what you is that what you put in the three in the zero in the 0 to 35 no that's in within the entire area but within the 0 to35 if you look one line above that it says uh total area in the 0 to35 it's 315 like the Mr burn pointed out you owed 3,000 3,000 scratch my glasses okay I apologize for confusion I we're just trying to this you know you should not be apologizing for this you hired a you hired a a consultant to represent and I don't think he's done a real good job of doing that but I I feel comfortable I think anyhow is there any further questions from the board yeah oh there there is never mind I've see it they added they've gone to four species now I see it nothing else from the board um just that within the 35 it's still partially u- shape I don't know if you prefer it to just be flat across still see yeah I I guess in this case I I don't know if i' I don't know that I'd be all that concerned is is everybody okay with the U shape like this or fine yeah could you fin could you just explain what you just said it a little hard to hear you over yeah sorry um So within the 35 you had asked for it to not be a u-shape um and it still is a bit of a u-shape even though it does go farther um up and is more stacked towards the Wetland I think the only reason I'm good with it is because it actually I mean the the resource continues to wrap so wrap a little bit so I guess I'm I'm okay with that but okay anybody on the audience anybody on Zoom nope any further discussion among the board would somebody like to make a motion to approve the project with special conditions so move oh go ahead so moved second uh Paul hi Ellie hi Rick hi uh David I uh Jack okay chair votes I uh carries unanimously thank you I appreciate your patience have a good night thank you next order of business another notice continued notice of intent for SC 8324315835 foot lward Pier extension and 160 square feet of float within fish run land containing shellfish land under the ocean land subject Coastal storm Flowage the riverfront area salt marsh and the buffer zones to a coastal Beach and salt marsh good evening Craig Ferrari with down Cape engineering uh here representing the property owners at this site um so I believe most of this was discussed at the last meeting uh the main thing we're waiting for was the enh hasp letter we have received that letter which is a not take uh that this project will not substantially affect any of those species um so just to reiterate it's an existing Pier we're modifi modifying the license to permit the the float and ramp at the end of the pier and a landward extension over the salt marsh just to bring that Pier back to the lawn so that they don't have to walk through those resource areas to access this pier happy to answer any questions you folks have question from the board just curious how you anticipate building that Boardwalk I mean it's it's not something a barge can get to without grounding um it's just my information I'm just curious about that um you know I I have I have had some discussions with with lmco Marine I I believe that they're um you know looking looking at this project um I you know I I don't know that I have the specifics on exactly how they they'll be they'll be driving those piles but they're they're very experienced with this uh type of construction um so you know they'll try to do it in the in the least disruptive way possible so we have pretty specific regulation on grounding a barge to do work and just concerned about that yep that that's understandable I wouldn't I wouldn't think that You' you'd be able to do this with a barge I think there would be some other Machinery that they would they would need to do this thank you and we will have a we will have a special condition that says that they're not allowed to damage the salt marsh and if there is any damage they will have to repair that so yeah that was my next question if they're not doing it from the barge we have to protect the the shore side of that maybe we should have a plan of their access protocol well their protocol and and the access that they'd be using if they're going over the land yeah yeah so that will all be part of the protocol for Access and access as well then so uh Craig can you just add make sure that make sure it's slenco if Lemco is the one that are going to be doing it make sure it's Lenco that actually does the the protocol and IT addresses access as well as what they're going to do to prevent any damage to the salt marsh or other resource areas absolutely sounds reasonable to me that should be uh submitted I would say submit that uh three weeks before before any work uh uh is is set to work or is set to begin uh submit that so the administrator can review that okay and then if she has any questions she can bring it back to the board anybody else uh Finn anything else anybody on the audience anybody in Zoom nope unless there's any further uh discussion along the board would somebody like to make a motion to uh approve the project with special conditions uh and calling out specifically the no damage to the salt marsh or other Wetland resource areas and if any damage does occur they need to uh repair that damage and uh the issuance of a um work protocol that specifically stes States how they are going to avoid uh Wetland resource area uh damage and the access route and it should be filed by the lmco the contractor and then I think I would also add that uh if any if U the contractor changes any time during the uh project that they notifi the Conservation Commission before proceeding somebody like to make a motion to that effect so moved Rick second second all right Paul hi Ellie hi Rick hi David I jack I chair votes I carries unanimously thank you very much all right moving on to certificates of compliance uh we've got four uh certificates uh the three I'm going to do as easy SE 83-1 774 49 and 51 Southshore Drive SE 83-1 632 49 51 Southshore Drive and SE 8321 1599 Vernon Street uh all those are easy uh do I have a motion to to issue issue certificates of compliance for SE 83-1 774 SE 83-1 1632 and SE 83259 so moved second thank you that's for 8 n and [Music] 10 uh Paul hi Ellie hi Rick hi David hi Jack hi chair votes I carries unanimously last one is compliance for if I could just to clarify one thing um on one of the ones you just approved it's the artifact AUD that we here earlier on I just wanted to clarify that and in the other conditions that was originally done there was a wall and a platform permanent for both Parcels I just want to make it clear that the wall and the platform on this one was constructed according to the plan and there was no Wall constructed on that one I know you've appr it but I just want to be clear it's on the record that that's this wall and this platform were permitted and they were approved I just want to clear that that's that's what was done so all of what was done but that what was done okay so so noted thank thank you Karen thank you uh let's see last one for the certificate of compliance for SE 83229407807 um I think where they originally were planning to put some mitigation on the left of proposed Pier it didn't hold uh so they kind of shifted it and you can see it in this new plan they shifted it more towards this area and it looks like they wrapped it up around here and it the original plan just had it slightly more to the so all sell okay everybody good on that yeah you want toit that F we there oh did you see it it's there okay yeah all right um so unless there's any discussion about that one you're all good y all right I would somebody like to make a motion to issue the certificate of compliance for SE 83229407807 no moved there second second um Paul hi Ellie hi Rick hi David hi Jack hi chair votes Z carries unanimously why telling you to send those down I didn't want to interrupt you we're on a rule look I haven't even I haven't even sent out the last um 49 and 51 will have three sheets to sign Three Sheets yes those need to go into 104 those one of them a couple of people won't won't sign 104 Rick and Ellie don't sign 104 which will be SE 2429 they had voted no on 24 okay oh well yeah what no we did not sign it apologies just following up it wouldn't be the end of the world if they did but house cleaning yeah wow this is uh oh that's why these things I'm these were these were attached to the first file that's I pulled them out and I was looking for them so sorry I should have explained that okay these are the certificates the last two certificates nobody's showing up for the uh enforcement hearing huh shock that's a bold move they care all right so let me uh read while they're finishing the the signing here we'll move into enforcement we have two I'm going to open these both at the same time so we can discuss both because they're the same violation um this is enforcement for RJ Resorts Riviera Beach Resort owner LLC 327 Southshore Drive and RJ Resorts Bluewater Beach Resort owner LLC for 291 and 301 Southshore Drive and Finn uh yes so the resorts have an order of conditions that allows for raking under um special conditions the conservation administrator was notified that the raking of the beach occurred without the required supervision of mass Autobon uh the ca investigated the beach and found raking marks indicating unpermitted raking with heavy machinery on the beaches two fines were issued to each property and the property owners responded saying that to their knowledge they did not rake and had suspended raking due to Plover activity at River Beach and then here's the attached images of the raking and the reduced rack line um so we have a mystery raker guy somebody taking their yard break excavator from West gouth a few years ago yeah she had a couple more that indicated the you can see the heavy machinery it might be towards the bottom here it is and there are plovers at this beach now or are turn which beach is this again verier and bl okay closer to Smugglers Smugglers okay liouse actually there's one the Smugglers not anymore all the chicks died are they all do they know what happened yeah Somebody went down there and set off fireworks on 4th of July and tore off all the netting and scared the hell out of them and they tried to save them and they thought they could save one but they didn't well that's real good in with the Autobon wonderful did they catch the person doing the fireworks no was that night as most fireworks but they they damaged the the exclosure and everything yep they tore it all out I haven't seen that sort of thing for there were a lot of fireworks out I don't know any left all the debris on the beach too and don't anybody stopped anybody from doing it well I had I had them two houses down from me and I'm nowhere close to the water I came home and there was a whole line of cars enjoying the show down my street yeah I had my poor dogs were just my street too yeah and you're wondering these were super duper super duper ones mine were too I was on the on the river over in Dennis on the night of Fourth of July and there the fireworks show like you wouldn't believe and I don't know but it was my understanding the fireworks are illegal in the state of Massachusetts and I don't know what the ypd or the dentist Police Department is doing you know obviously they're looking the other way so um if it's an issue then maybe we could have representatives of the police department come and talk to us about the the you know the situation and the danger of destroying habitat um during such events I think fish and wildlife if if you had four although we well we won't getting yeah fish and wildlife too I think either way fish and wildlife serves is going to have some questions the town that's for sure so well natural resources too wouldn't they wouldn't they be interested in um enforcement or that kind of thing again fish and wildlife is going to Trump everything else there so that's that's a quarter million for each bird that dies just like the environmental police is that what you're talking about it's above it's above oh yeah yeah okay well whatever what I see is you know at least in my neighborhood they even block cars block off the end of the streets really and to pray but people go down in the middle of the street they're letting off these fireworks and one of my neighbors said you know it got on top of my roof and oh believe it yeah this is right right down on Wood Road yeah it was right down on Wood Road I mean that's a pretty major road they were blowing them off right there yeah what happens if somebody needs an like a ambulance the move the car well let's uh let's finish these off so uh clearly I mean we we issued uh 100 was it $100 uh two $300 fines to each property so four total all right is there anything more we can do or is that it I think for now that's all we can do we've got to make sure that they aren't they don't continue to do something like this you know in the future but if they're saying they've suspended um Beach raking it's just another stupid reason why you shouldn't don't be traing they don't each each got two $300 fines so it's $600 together total yeah it's hard to suspend something if you don't admit to doing it yeah yes and they could they could just great point I found the whole point it was a little odd because they said we didn't do it but we've suspended but we suspended our our uh Beering so we didn't do it but we didn't do it okay but we can't re they didn't show up so could we request their presence to discuss the situation I think the enforcement order did request their their presence but I don't think it's going to make any difference because I think we're all going to sign the enforcement order and okay approve the the uh citation so how do we find out about it um I believe Britney was notified by someone that the raking happened without Autobon present and she investigated and found these and took the pictures the next day um which is the only reason the rack line even appears at all but it is definitely reduced and I went back and investigated a few weeks ago and they hadn't raped that's corduroy that's you know I was hoping the new owners were going to uh turn over a new new le but got the new owners learn those are the new owners yeah now do we need to vote on that yeah so do I have a motion to uh uh ratify both enforcement orders um that are being discussed so move okay so moved and Ellie a second all right uh Paul hi Ellie hi Rick I David I jack I chair votes I uh last order of business then is the approval of meet of meeting minutes for June 20th 2024 anybody read them I like to make a motion then so moved to accept them is there a second second thank you UL 14 so I gotta get Jack and Pat to sign that I I uh Ellie hi Rick hi uh David hi Jack hi we need a pen and chair votes I carries unanimously all right any further business not reasonably anticipated Rec yes thank you anything all right would somebody like to like to make a motion to adjourn so moved there a second second hi Ellie hi Rick hi David hi Jack hi care votes I oh not bad 6 it is 62 625 yeah you want it