The Falmouth Conservation Commission MEETING MINUTES - WEDNESDAY, APRIL 26, 2017 Selectmen s Meeting Room, Falmouth Town Hall, 7:00 p.m.

Transcription

1 The Falmouth Conservation Commission MEETING MINUTES - WEDNESDAY, APRIL 26, 2017 Selectmen s Meeting Room, Falmouth Town Hall, 7:00 p.m. Present: Absent: Mary Schumacher, Vice-Chair Jamie Mathews Courtney Bird Betsy Gladfelter Steve Patton, Alternate Jennifer McKay, Administrator Russell Robbins, Kristin Alexander, Maurie Harlow-Hawkes, Mark Gurnee, Alternate Ms. Schumacher opened the meeting at 7:02 p.m. MINUTES 4/12/2017 Mr. Patton: Move to adopt the minutes as corrected. OTHER BUSINESS Boy Scout Troop 40 requesting to camp at the Souza parcel April Ms. McKay: This is their annual boy scout outing on the Souza parcel. I recommend that the Board grant approval. Ms. Gladfelter: Move to grant approval for this request. Mr. Mathews: Second. REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE UNDER DETERMINATION OF APPLICABILITY Ken & Lorraine Montouri, Lot 7H, Pine Bank Road, North Falmouth, MA For permission to construct a new 3-bedroom single-family house with attached garage, deck, porches with stairs, install walkways, landscape walls, Title 5 sewage disposals system, utilities, dry wells, gravel driveway and the associated clearing, excavating, grading and landscaping. Ms. McKay: Please table the vote. Ms. Gladfelter: Move to table the vote. Mr. Mathews: Second. Ms. Gladfelter: Move to untable the vote. Mr. Mathews: Second. Ms. McKay: The applicant has requested a continuance until May 17,

2 Mr. Bird: At the request of the applicant I move to continue the hearing until May 17, Gregory Nicoll, Maker Lane road layout including 19 Wood Neck Rd, 6 Maker Lane, 5 Maker Lane and 3 Maker Lane, Falmouth, MA For permission to grade and level a section of Maker Lane, add 2-inch dense grade, pitch grade to a 32-ft drainage swale to be installed, pave Maker Lane entrance and to conduct tree pruning at 19 Wood Neck Rd. Ms. McKay: The applicant has requested a continuance until May 3, Mr. Mathews: At the request of the applicant I move to continue the hearing until May 3, REQUEST FOR A CONTINUANCE UNDER A NOTICE OF INTENT Shirley Rothwell, 28 Drift Road, West Falmouth, MA For permission to install a new Title 5 sewage disposal system within naturally vegetated resource area and buffer, to construct a new 6-ft x 12-ft deck, expand existing deck, install an underground electric line and the associated clearing, excavating, grading and landscaping. Ms. McKay: The applicant has requested a continuance until May 24, Mr. Bird: At the request of the applicant I move to continue the hearing until May 24, John Zizza, 82 Waterside Drive, North Falmouth, MA For permission to relocate six (6) large boulders within an area of stones to open up three channels between 20-ft and 40-ft wide through the boulder field for small craft navigation into Megansett Harbor. Ms. McKay: The applicant has requested a continuance until May 24, Ms. Gladfelter: At the request of the applicant I move to continue the hearing until May 24, Ms. Gladfelter: Is this the second continuance? Ms. McKay: Yes. Salt Pond Area Bird Sanctuaries, Inc. & Quissett Harbor House Land Trust, Inc., 48 & 71 Quissett Harbor Road, Falmouth, MA For permission to conduct maintenance activities to preserve the cultural and natural resources at the Knob through trail and access maintenance, erosion control, vegetation management and the associated clearing, excavating, grading and landscaping. Ms. McKay: The applicant has requested a continuance until May 3, Mr. Bird: At the request of the applicant I move to continue the hearing until May 3, Mr. Mathews: Second. 2

3 REQUESTS FOR DETERMINATION OF APPLICABILITY James O Connor, 221 Sippewissett Road, Falmouth, MA For permission to vista prune. Ms. McKay: Jurisdiction: within 100-ft resource area buffer to coastal bank and in land subject to coastal storm flowage (flood zone A). This property was issued an Order of Conditions for house construction around For compliance, I had reviewed with Mr. O Connor in 1999 and discussed the requirements and allowances under vista pruning. The O Connor s are applying for around their 4 th RDA for vista pruning. They have been maintaining their view corridor as permitted over the years and are once again asking to vista prune using Seaside Arborists (Steven Buckhoff). Staff recommends a negative 2 (under the State and the bylaw). Resource area boundaries are not confirmed by this RDA. Mr. Mathews: Move to accept staff s recommendation. Stephen Hixon, 250 Acapesket Road, East Falmouth, MA For permission to replace three 15-ft pilings with three 30-ft pilings. Ms. McKay: Jurisdiction: on coastal bank, bank of salt pond, in salt marsh, BVW/freshwater wetland, land under the ocean, land under salt pond, land containing shellfish, land subject to coastal storm flowage (flood zone A) and within 100-ft resource area buffer to coastal bank, inland bank, bank of salt pond, land under the ocean, land containing shellfish, salt marsh and BVW/freshwater wetland. The existing dock is in the footprint as approved under DEP However the existing jet-ski float was not approved under the expired OOC and must be removed prior to the piling replacement. The 35-ft buffer strip requirement under DEP does not exist. The vegetation is cleared into the wetland resource area. There are also two large cedars (11- inch and 13-inch) that were cut without a permit. The new owner is being told that a Notice of Intent will have to be filed to correct all wetland violations or enforcement action will be required. Staff recommends a positive 3 (under the State and the bylaw) to replace the pilings. Resource area boundaries are not confirmed by this RDA. Mr. Bird: Move to accept staff s recommendation. Sippewissett Highlands Beach Trust (c/o Larry Sheehan), Lot A, Sippewissett Road (Map A), Falmouth, MA For permission to erect two kayak racks on a cobblestone area. Ms. McKay: Jurisdiction: within coastal dune 100-ft resource area buffer to coastal bank, coastal dune, salt marsh, coastal beach, land under the ocean, land containing shellfish, BVW/freshwater wetland and in land subject to coastal storm flowage (flood zone V). On 4/13/17 staff met on-site with Larry Sheehan, representing the Sippewissett Highlands Beach Trust to review the kayak area. The proposal was scaled and shown in bare, cobble area landward of the beach. Minimal vegetation shall need to be pruned within the rack footprint and the access path shall be from the beach, not across the vegetated coastal dune area. The rack post supports shall be inserted into PVC sleeves to allow for removal in case of a storm event. This installation will be the same as when the Trust installed kayak racks in 2012; that set up was installed and maintained as approved and is working well. The Trust is making attempts to keep water crafts off vegetated coastal dune areas. Staff recommends a negative 2 (under the State and the bylaw). Resource area boundaries are not confirmed by this RDA. 3

4 Ms. Gladfelter: Move to accept staff s recommendation. Mr. Mathews: Second. Gregory Nicoll, Maker Lane road layout including 19 Wood Neck Rd, 6 Maker Lane, 5 Maker Lane and 3 Maker Lane, Falmouth, MA For permission to grade and level a section of Maker Lane, add 2-inch dense grade, pitch grade to a 32-ft drainage swale to be installed, pave Maker Lane entrance and to conduct tree pruning at 19 Wood Neck Rd. The hearing is continued until May 3, Harold Sears, 17 Fells Road, Falmouth, MA For permission to replace the existing wood timber retaining wall with a cut stone wall in the same location and dimensions. Ms. McKay: Jurisdiction: on coastal bank and within 100-ft resource area buffer to coastal bank, inland bank, bank of salt pond, land under the ocean, land containing shellfish, salt marsh, BVW/freshwater wetland and in land subject to coastal storm flowage (flood zone V). The house has been in existence since before the wetland regulations and there is a clear path for access to the wall. No trees or vegetation to be removed except for invasive plant species growing over and through the wall. Staff recommends a negative 2 (under the State and the bylaw). Resource area boundaries are not confirmed by this RDA. Mr. Mathews: Move to accept staff s recommendation. Patricia & Bruce Stivaletta, 65 Deacons Avenue, Falmouth, MA For permission to repair the marine railway consisting of two 20-ft length rails with two new 20-ft rails pre-constructed rails consisting of 6-inch x 6-inch pressure treated members attached to the rails at 5-ft intervals. Ms. McKay: Jurisdiction: in land under the ocean, rocky intertidal, land under salt pond, within 100-ft resource area buffer to coastal bank, bank of salt pond, land under the ocean, land containing shellfish and in land subject to coastal storm flowage (flood zone V & A). The railway has been in existence since before wetland regulations and the Stivaletta s have filed for repairs for structures on the properties over the years. Mr. Stivaletta explained the work as primarily by hand. Divers will cut out the 20-ft rotted section of rail, remove the pieces via a crane located in the upland, remove rotted creosote timbers that supported the rails and replace the timbers in the same footprint. The tidal floor consists of layers of small cobble rocks. Staff recommends a negative 2 (under the State and the bylaw). Resource area boundaries are not confirmed by this RDA. Mr. Bird: Move to accept staff s recommendation. Mr. Patton: Second. Cynthia Maddox, 78 Bay Road, North Falmouth, MA For permission to pump, fill and abandon the existing cesspools and install a new Title 5 sewage disposal system. Ms. McKay: Jurisdiction: within 100-ft resource area buffer to coastal bank, inland bank, land under waterbodies, isolated land subject to flooding and BVW/freshwater wetland. Staff met with Tom Bunker to discuss placement of leach field. It shall be reconfigured to preserve certain trees and mitigation shall be proposed closer to wetland resource areas in disturbed areas. A revised plan was submitted showing the reconfigured leach field and mitigation trees and shrubs are required for compensation. Standard conditions shall be followed for survival of the mitigation plantings. Staff 4

5 recommends a negative 2 (under the State and the bylaw). Resource area boundaries are not confirmed by this RDA. Ms. Gladfelter: Move to accept staff s recommendation. Charles Matteo, 77 Miami Avenue, East Falmouth, MA For permission to replace the existing 4-ft x 14-ft wood stairway and 4-ft x 4-ft wood landing. Ms. McKay: Jurisdiction: on coastal bank, inland bank, bank of salt pond, in land under the ocean within 100-ft resource area buffer to land containing shellfish, salt marsh, BVW/freshwater wetland and in land subject to coastal storm flowage (flood zone A). This work was approved under an RDA approved in 2014 but has not been done and the RDA has expired. NOTE: Requirements under the last RDA - Cinder blocks were required for removal from the bottom of the bank by no later than May 14, The cinder blocks are still present and the owner has been told to remove them immediately. The tree replacement was planted in May of 2014, but is gone and filled in with grass - also to be replaced now or no later than May 15, Cedar saplings (2) have been removed near and on the coastal bank replacement required. Invasive vines could be removed but paths through the naturally vegetated buffer have been established no further cutting allowed. Staff recommends a negative 2 (under the State and the bylaw). Resource area boundaries are not confirmed by this RDA. Mr. Bird: Move to accept staff s recommendation. Thomas & Karen Tierney, 167 Nobska Road, Woods Hole, MA For permission to conduct yearly maintenance on the existing sandplain grassland meadow approved under DEP Ms. McKay: Jurisdiction: on coastal bank and within 100-ft resource area buffer to coastal bank, inland bank, land under waterbodies, BVW/freshwater wetland, coastal dune and in land subject to coastal storm flowage (flood zone A). This had been a project originally approved by the Commission in 2004 to create an assemblage of sandplain grassland species within an area of nonnative grasses and invasive plants. The Tierney s have committed to this maintenance over the years. The current situation on-site appears to be successful. While many of the native species are not up yet, the base plant community of native grasses appears to be doing quite well with very few invasive species present. To my knowledge, this is the only sandplain grassland in Falmouth created on private property of reasonable size that has been successful. I recommend approval for continued maintenance for the control and removal of invasive plant species. Staff recommends a negative 2 (under the State and the bylaw). Resource area boundaries are not confirmed by this RDA. Mr. Bird: Move to accept staff s recommendation. CONTINUED REQUESTS FOR DETERMINATION OF APPLICABILITY Ken & Lorraine Montouri, Lot 7H, Pine Bank Road, North Falmouth, MA For permission to construct a new 3-bedroom single-family house with attached garage, deck, porches with stairs, install walkways, landscape walls, Title 5 sewage disposals system, utilities, dry wells, gravel driveway and 5

6 the associated clearing, excavating, grading and landscaping. The hearing is continued until May 17, REQUESTS FOR HEARINGS UNDER A NOTICE OF INTENT Seascape Association, Inc. (c/o Timothy Gallagher), A Beach, Waterside Drive (Map 04-02A A), North Falmouth, MA For permission to maintain vegetative cover, vista prune, control invasive plants, install native trees and shrubs and the associated landscaping. Ms. McKay: No comment at this time. Timothy Gallagher (Association member) I m here to get back the intent to do vista pruning. We got approval in February of 2015 and did it. We needed to apply again and also need to plant trees. We hope you will allow vista pruning on the beach and that we maintain the boardwalk. Attachment A is the list of all we want done. There are two maps attached an existing conditions map and the updated map is our proposal. We have outlined the area of vista pruning. The area to the north is where we want to remove invasive plants and replace them with native species. We will plant 3 new trees one in the northeast corner of the property and the other 2 are on the southern side of the boardwalk. The locations have been staked and approved by Mark. We have hired Hamilton Landscaping to do the work. Ms. McKay read the statement re invasive plant control from the application. What does maintain mean? Mr. Gallagher: We want to plant bayberry bushes and many more native grasses. Ms. McKay read the last sentence in the section. You actually want to maintain the height of the bushes to 5-ft. Mr. Gallagher: We will leave alone anything outside the vista corridor if not invasive. Ms. McKay: Please take that last sentence out. Prior to removing the invasives you will have a site visit with Mark and I so we can work with you on identifying the invasives and what kind of plants to plant. Mr. Gallagher: We will plant the trees right away, but there will be no pruning until the fall. Ms. McKay: A Special Condition will be that you meet with staff and Hamilton Landscaping before you do any work. Mr. Patton: No questions or comments. Mr. Mathews: No questions or comments. Ms. Gladfelter: I m glad the trees are going in first. If you have a different contractor for some reason you must get approval from administration. Mr. Gallagher: Not a problem. Mr. Bird: The trees you re putting in were supposed to be put in 4 years ago. Why were they not? Mr. Gallagher: Two died and one wasn t put in. There is no water on property and that s the problem. This time we will carry buckets if necessary. Hamilton Landscaping will help us with it. They will also dig a good size hole and fill it with good dirt. Ms. Gladfelter: Move to close the hearing and take it under advisement. Salt Pond Area Bird Sanctuaries, Inc. & Quissett Harbor House Land Trust, Inc., 48 & 71 Quissett Harbor Road, Falmouth, MA For permission to conduct maintenance activities to preserve the cultural and natural resources at the Knob through trail and access maintenance, erosion control, vegetation management and the associated clearing, excavating, grading and landscaping. Ms. McKay: The hearing is continued until May 3,

7 The hearing occurred before the Clarke Trust hearing. Town of Falmouth DPW (c/o Raymond Jack), Menauhant Road (Map ), East Falmouth, MA For permission to widen the inlet at the Bournes Pond bridge to increase tidal flushing and improve water quality and aquatic habitat. The activities include widening the inlet from 50-ft to 90-ft by removing 12,600 sf of coastal bank & barrier beach east of the inlet, install a new two-span bridge, dredge approximately 5,800 cy of material and nourish adjacent beaches and dunes, reposition the eastern inlet jetty to the eastern side of the new inlet, extend the western side jetty along the inlet by 25-ft, remove an existing 25-ft jetty on the beach west of the inlet, provide a public fishing platform adjacent to the bridge and the associated clearing, excavating, grading and landscaping. Ms. McKay: Would you please table this hearing. Ms. Gladfelter: Move to table the hearing. Mr. Mathews: Second. Ms. Gladfelter: Move to untable the hearing. Virginia Valiela (Water Quality Management Committee) This is a complicated project. Jessica Janney of GHD Engineering will make the presentation. Jessica Janney (GHD) presented the plan and abutter s cards. A summary of the project follows: Tidal restoration project with increased habitat for shellfishery and eelgrass No negative impact to existing eelgrass beds or shellfish resources Widening inlet will remove 50% of target nitrogen reduction load half way to TMDL compliance Widening inlet from 50 to 90 does not increase flooding of residential properties Dredging footprint only increased in the channel and a small section of the pond Beach nourishment mitigates coastal erosion and protects Town infrastructure Ms. McKay (to Ms. Janney) Remember when we talked about the structure unearthed on Menauhant Beach? Have we talked about what we re going to do with the structure? As for having excess dredge spoil material - there may not be any. James McLoughlin (Town Engineer) We are still trying to figure out what the structure is. It may have been an outbuilding for another building further north when the road was along the beach. Once we confirm what it is we ll remove it. Ms. McKay: We don t want it buried again. Let s get it out and use the material to build up nice dunes. Not starting the project until 2018 or 19 it gives the Town time to do that. Mark and I looked at the planting plan and have some ideas re the planting. Mr. Bird: The fact of the matter is that sea level rise is an issue, and since we are planning for coastal resiliency why not raise the height of the bridge? It s a lot less expensive to build it higher now. Ms. Janney: I believe it was discussed and it was decided not to raise the bridge height because it would introduce bigger boats. There was a purposeful decision not to do that. Mr. Bird: We re talking about trade-offs here. There are ways to stop the boat problem. Ms. Schumacher: The Selectmen recently created a coastal resiliency committee to develop an action plan that ought to give recommendations about things like bridge height and coastal roads. You won t be doing this while the committee is in process so you might want to consider that possibility. Mr. Bird: The fact that this road has already been moved back means we should be looking at that. It would be prudent to consider raising bridges because of sea level rise. Ms. Schumacher: We should keep in mind that we don t want to continue doing what we ve been doing for years. 7

8 Ms. Valiela: We do take sea level rise seriously, but clearly the neighbors do not want the bridge raised because of increased boat traffic. A study shows that it is now higher than the expected rise. Ms. Schumacher: Do you know when the study was done? Ms. Valiela: In the last couple of years. John Ramsey (Applied Coastal) We did look at sea level rise last year. There are predictions all over the map. We re trying to keep this in context with the road. There are a lot of things to consider including that if we raised the bridge it would have an impact on the salt marsh. Ms. Gladfelter: Once we get to the building years it will be a 5 ½ to 6 million dollar project. Ms. Valiela: The cost of the whole project is 5 ½ million. Ms. Gladfelter: Do you really expect it to take 18months to 2 years? Will the road be closed? Ms. Janney: Yes, the road will be closed. We hope it will be closer to a year or 18 months. Ms. Gladfelter: Is it a double span? Attachment 4 shows the span. The dredge profile when the road is closed you can get in there, but when it s blocked you can t get the dredge in. What s proposed now? You might have a wider inlet, but at some point it might have sand pushed into it. Mr. Ramsey: The first thing is that widening the inlet widens the channel. A strong current pumps sand and a wider channel slows the current. There will be less material going into the entrance with an extended jetty. It won t be any different than what we re dealing with now. If you need a drag line in there to further dredge you won t have to go in as far. Ms. Gladfelter: The purpose of the project is to get more flushing and it s been dredged fairly recently. Mr. Ramsey: It hasn t had to be dredged in a long time. It s pretty stable. Ms. Gladfelter: Some day they might want to put more sand on the beach. Mr. Ramsey: Right now it s stable on the west side. Ms. Gladfelter: These are concerns I have with this project. Mike Kinney (Waterways Committee) Dredging is an issue. Inside dredging is a problem. South facing estuaries have to be dredged every year. We will wait until June to do it. We dredge where boats are. This will not be on a high priority list to be dredged and would have a time of year restriction. If you get to 90, a southeast storm in one day will crowd an entrance. Dredging is a major issue. By widening the entrance and slowing down the flow you have sand coming out the entrance. It will have to be dredged and we don t have a permit to dredge there. It will be a problem and with the resources we have it won t be on a high priority list. Ms. Gladfelter: Was it part of the comprehensive dredging permit? Ms. McKay: It could have been rolled in. Mr. Kinney: I m talking about between the jetties. Ms. Gladfelter: The bottom line is there will have to be dredging in order to keep this open. There will have to be an annual amount of money to keep this open. Ms. McKay to Ms. Valiela: Will the Town comply with all the monitoring that will have to be done and will there be money dedicated to do this? Where will that money come from? Ms. Valiela: It has to become part of our budget in the future. This is a complicated project. We are aware that this is work that has to be done. Ms. McKay: It will be in the OOC. The Board has had some issues with the Town following through on monitoring after the fact. What is that budget going to be? I d like to see a budget put together by the Water Quality Management Committee. Ms. Valiela: I can t put that together right now, but I am meeting with the Treasurer next week. Ms. McKay: You can get an idea of what the budget is going to be. Ms. Gladfelter: As far as the time of year restrictions - are you considering that only for dredging? Ms. Janney: Mostly for dredging and setting the cofferdams. Ms. Gladfelter: Your time of year restrictions are from 8/31 to 12/31? Ms. Janney: Yes. We will be working outside of restrictions and weather dependent. It will be tricky. The contractor will bid knowing these restrictions. 8

9 Ms. Gladfelter: A shellfish survey was done just within the dredge footprint. But dredging could affect other areas. There is good shellfish on the shelves to the sides. Ms. Janney: There will be a temporary impact. The long term impact to shellfish will be positive. Ms. Gladfelter: You re not saying anything about those flats and that concerns me. I understand what the goal is but I m curious about the historic channel to the west. That has the most erosion wouldn t it be better to have the inlet in that area? Mr. Ramsey: One of the things we re looking at is that after the 1938 hurricane that area eroded very rapidly. When the ebb shoal went away it started eroding. One issue is that the area is armored all along the shoreline. The series of groins trap the sand. Ms. Gladfelter: That s now. For all those years sometimes it was wider and sometimes less wide. Mr. Ramsey: You can maintain the inlet any way you want. They maintained it on the western end during pre-permitting days and everything went the way they wanted. If I said I d like to put the inlet back there I d get killed. We can do something in the future. Ms. Gladfelter: Why are we doing this in the first place? This is to mitigate the nitrogen input. I went through and looked at all these letters from DMF, etc. and several echoed the question aren t we just removing the problem from one place to another? Is it really responsible on our part to do this? I asked the question where is our baseline data? I don t think that s an irresponsible position. How can you show me that it will reduce nitrogen pollution in the pond? Mr. Ramsey: The issue with the whole solution to pollution is not the question here. This happens to be narrower than it wants to be. We are trying to turn it back to what is more akin to what it wants to be. Not trying to make this wide open so we can flush out all the nitrogen, just trying to make it more natural. Ms. Gladfelter: There is a lot more nitrogen in the pond. Ms. Schumacher: The argument in your request is about the nitrogen removal. Ms. Gladfelter: We as community members are putting the nitrogen into the system. You will reduce it in the pond and push it out to other areas. Mr. Ramsey: Nothing is changing. There will be one pulse of increased nitrogen going out in the winter. Ms. Gladfelter: We will be putting nitrogen into the broader environment instead of dealing with it where it is. Mr. Ramsey: This is just one aspect of it. It s not the full solution to the Bournes Pond problem. Mr. Mathews: No questions or comments. Mr. Patton: How will we remove the structures? Ms. McKay: We will work with the Town on that. Ms. Valiela: We will come before you with an NOI. Ms. Gladfelter: Before we get the data? Ms. Valiela: We will get the data to you right away. Ms. Gladfelter: It s also a concern that the TMDL were based on something done 12 years ago. Ms. Valiela: That was set by the DEP and the EPA. Ms. Gladfelter: I have a problem with causing one problem by solving another. I m concerned when the solution to get to these regulatory numbers affects other areas. Ms. Valiela: The studying was done re sewering and found that on the southern part of the peninsula it was more important to do this. There will have to be further sewering in Town. Ms. Gladfelter: There is an issue with sewering because of sea level rise. I do appreciate all the work you have done. Mr. Patton: Are you removing the groin or the jetty? It s confusing in what you have told us and the way it is written in the proposal. Mr. Ramsey: That s a labeling issue. Mr. Patton: What about the structure that is there now? Mr. Ramsey: We will shorten the groin and rebuild the jetty to its permitted length so it traps sand 9

10 better than it does now. Mr. Patton: What is the reason for extending the western jetty? Mr. Ramsey: It will hold the sand better and help the erosion problem. Mr. Patton: In addressing the scouring, is the orientation of the channel relative? Mr. Ramsey: We try to have inlets lined up. Mr. Patton: The boat traffic is very minimal on the pond now. Will the bridge survive 86 years at its current height? Increasing the width is an improvement. Mr. Ramsey: We expect it will. Nitrogen is always increasing to the north. Mr. Patton: But the shellfishing is good in the north and we want to preserve that. It is surprising to me that there is one page on monitoring in this huge presentation. Can t it be built into this project? Ms. Janney: The town has a pond watch program with monitoring plans. Mr. Patton: There should be a monitoring component that is a little more fleshed out. Mr. Bird: I concur with Betsy that we re pushing a problem down the road. The issue of nitrogen the solution is not polluting the ocean. We are already using it as a dump now. The project has merit and certainly is a short term solution. What we really need to do is look at ways we can address nitrogen loading at the source and not let it go somewhere else. Did I understand correctly that by widening this inlet the entire length of the inlet from the ocean to Bournes Pond would need dredging on a continual basis? Mr. Ramsey: 90 feet is needed to keep sand moving. We are looking at this as not any real change to existing practice but we will have currents sufficient to keep it clear. Mr. Bird: Would it help if the bridge height is raised as far as dredging goes? Mr. Ramsey: Yes. Mr. Bird: Clearly there is a potential for larger boats if you raise the height of the bridge. You can build something that will detract from that. You need to think outside the box. Ms. McKay: Since you re getting the baseline data, you can also look at the DMF letter and see what the monitoring proposal will be. Then we ll all be on the same page re that. Did I see a design for a cofferdam? Ms. Janney: Yes, but it may not be the actual design. Ms. McKay: I ll have to write that into the OOC. Tom Duncan (Waterways Committee) Nitrogen is very negative but when it gets into Vineyard Sound it will not pollute. Jay Decoteau (abutters on south side) presented a letter and photos to the Board. He read the letter highlighting the concerns of his family and showing how erosion has occurred in the area when inlets are changed. I may have questions for the presenters tonight and I would like you to have the answers after I receive that information. Ms. Gladfelter: If the hearing were closed tonight we couldn t take any further information. Ms. McKay: The hearing will be continued. If you me your questions we will send them to the Water Quality Management Committee, GHD and Applied Coastal. How long will it take for the data information and the monitoring plan to be fleshed out? Does continuing the hearing to May 17 th work for you? Ms. Valiela: No, it s too soon. Ms. McKay: How about June 7 th? Ms. Valiela: Yes. Ms. Gladfelter: At the request of the applicant I move to continue the hearing until June 7, Ms. Schumacher (to the Decoteaus) Can you attend a hearing on that day? Mr. Decoteau: Yes. 10

11 CONTINUED REQUESTS FOR A HEARING UNDER A NOTICE OF INTENT Beccles Road Nominee Trust (c/o Dana Doe), 19 Beccles Road & Sippewissett Road (Map C), Falmouth, MA For permission to install approximately 100 linear feet of steel sheeting along the base of the existing mortared stone revetment which includes construction access, vegetation restoration and the associated clearing, excavating, grading and landscaping. Ms. McKay: We do not have a quorum but with the agreement of the applicant we can reset it. The applicant is agreeable. Ms. Gladfelter: Move to reset the quorum. Quorum: Jamie, Betsy, Courtney, Mary, Steve Ms. McKay (to Mr. McGrath) Would you please go through a brief history of the project? Michael McGrath (Holmes & McGrath) presented photos. The project is to address a riprap at the rear of the land at Beccles Road. Resource areas include Buzzards Bay, coastal beach, coastal bank, Velocity zone, an existing mortared riprap. The first photo I showed you is the existing riprap. Because of the white color at the base and above it you can see that it s more weathered. In previous submissions I gave you the dimensions of what was apparent there. The next photo was taken on October 6 th and you can see two buoys underneath the toe stones. The wall is in eminent danger of failing. There are a series of rebars that were driven to be sure we are clear of the stones when we are driving the sheeting and won t hit the stones. The piping shows that material will wash out behind the wall and the next series of photos show a riprap collapse. On the 4 th page you can see an enormous void behind the riprap. We couldn t see behind it before. Ms. Gladfelter: Likely there are voids. Mr. McGrath: There are voids. The next series of photos show that apparently the beach in front of the house was greater. Aerial photos show a drop in the elevation of the beach. 1 Wigwam has a short jetty and an armored frontage for a couple hundred feet. You gave them approval to raise the riprap a foot. A sand ramp was constructed and after it was discontinued they shaped it into a dune and now it is completely gone. Erosion has gone beyond the inland edge of the riprap. The riprap could collapse at any time. The stone will be installed seaward of the proposed sheeting (Phase 1). In phase 2 we will rebuild the riprap with dry laid stone. We have tried to obtain permission from the Association to get access but don t have it yet. Mean high water on this end of the Cape is about one foot higher in my estimation. I observed the temperature of Buzzards Bay and last year it was warmer than ever. These two things have accelerated erosion along Buzzards Bay. The groin is full of sand so the damage is a combination of what I mentioned above. The groin that is owned by the people who own the beach has trapped sand. To say that we have to nourish that beach is unfair to my client. I don t know how you can condition that we put sand on someone else s land. Ms. McKay: When was the house rebuilt? Mr. McGrath: 5 years ago. Ms. McKay: Was the landscaping done at the same time? I know there was a lot of work done by Solien. Dana Doe (applicant) We tried to rebuild the house on the existing foundation. Ms. McKay: When was the landscaping done? Mr. Doe: At the same time in The house was vacant for about a year. Ms. McKay: How was the wall then? Mr. Doe: The wall was fine, but there was erosion at the toe. We tried to mend the wall by putting concrete in some of the holes, but were told no to do that. A winter storm came and the sand was all gone. 11

12 Ms. McKay: Why not just rebuild the wall all at once. Why in phases? Mr. McGrath: We were trying to get it done before summer. Ms. McKay: Why can t you just rebuild it? Mr. McGrath: That s an option. Ms. McKay: I don t see the necessity to do it in phases. Would you have to re-design it? Mr. McGrath: No just change it to a bigger toe. Ms. McKay: Why wait until the 11 th hour to repair it when it s failing? I would prefer it done all at once. Can you do it without going on to Association property? If you put bigger toe stones in there, how will you excavate and then get them in? Mr. McGrath: We can install riprap from the top, but it s not a good idea. I m not sure I can reach that far. Ms. McKay: Construction access would be through the mitigation planting? Would the Association allow that? It would be a lot less destructive to the area. I would prefer it done in one phase. Mr. Bird: When you did the construction the first time most of the activity centered around the house and you did just a cursory landscaping? Mr. Doe: I did a lot of landscaping when we built the house. All the plants are new plants. Mr. Bird: You and the people doing the landscaping noticed no problem with the wall. Mr. Doe: No we didn t. Mr. Bird: The flowable fill are you going to inject it behind the wall? Ms. Gladfelter: They are not going to fill in the voids. Mr. McGrath: We will drive the sheeting and there will be a gap. I need something to connect the wall to. The fill is only temporary. Mr. Bird: One of my concerns is that because of the dynamic conditions where the toe stones are going to go, it s vulnerable because of erosion. The sinking of the beach will continue and you will put toe stones in and 3 years from now with storms, etc. - will this be effective? Mr. McGrath: You can t say it will not happen and some beaches have disappeared but if they are installed right it should be fine. Mr. Bird: There are all kinds of approaches to projects. I appreciate Mr. Doe s attempt to keep it that way. I just want to be assured that with all this effort the conditions can be satisfied. Mr. Doe: The seawall itself is in great shape; it s the bottom that s a problem. Since we started the process I m more worried about it than ever. I m trying to fix it so the house stays up on the hill. Mr. Bird: I understand what s going on because I live in the area. Ms. Gladfelter: When were the pictures taken that you gave to us and where were they taken? Ms. McKay: You need them labeled. Mr. McGrath: I will label them and bring you another copy. Ms. Gladfelter: For the record it needs to be on the sheet. Sand moves in and out in different places. I understand your concern. If you were doing this project and were allowed to armor it, is this the wall you would put in? Mr. McGrath: I have space constraints. Ms. Gladfelter: If you re going to build a wall, don t you want to build the best design possible for that site? Mr. McGrath: I just waited 3 years for a Chapter 91 license and I d have to wait 3 years to get this done because of the slow to answer of the DEP. Ms. Gladfelter: You wouldn t normally do this with sheeting. Mr. McGrath: Sheeting is important to keeping the wall there. The house is too close. I have a certain amount of space. Ms. Gladfelter: I think you have enough space for a different slope. Mr. McGrath: This is a very high wall. Ms. Gladfelter: If a hurricane hits it could hit anywhere. I m concerned for Mr. Doe and the money you will spend that you get the best protection for the house. 12

13 Mr. Mathews: Is the same design as the one on Penzance? Mr. McGrath: Yes. Mr. Patton: No questions or comments. Ms. Gladfelter: Your constraint is because of the slow permitting by DEP? Mr. McGrath: And access. We d have to provide beach nourishment forever. Mr. Bird: The truth of the matter is nobody knows for sure because everything is site specific. You re dealing with site realities and you can t make a silk purse out of a sow s ear. I wish that everyone involved would work together with this, but that s not our problem. If you feel that this will work and it won t fall into the ocean in the near future, who am I to say that some other approach is better? Mr. McGrath: We are also guided by your regulations. Ms. McKay: If you did phase 1 when would phase 2 happen? Mr. McGrath: I don t know. Mr. Doe: Is my word good enough that I would do it soon? Ms. McKay: No disrespect to you, but no one s word is good enough. We have been burned too often. Mr. Doe: If we re able to get steel sheeting in soon. Ms. McKay: I just want to know about the reconstruction of the wall. Mr. Doe: In the winter. Ms. McKay: Okay. Ms. Gladfelter: Move to close the hearing and take it under advisement. Leslie Fields (Woods Hole Group) Installing a vertical sheet filled wall doesn t meet your performance standards. It will have an adverse effect on the beach. I disagree about the imminent threat to the wall. It s possible that the sand will come back in. There is no need to construct phase 1. We would urge that they go right to phase 2 and rebuild the revetment. That will not encroach on the Association beach. I urge the applicants to consider a more gradual slope and add beach nourishment. DEP agrees that you should do it in one step. DEP also says there should be some kind of beach nourishment. There should also be a monitoring component. Mr. Bird: In your proposed alternative how do you handle the transition? Ms. Fields: I don t know. They should talk to the property owners next door and ask them. The sharp angle at the end of the structure is causing more scouring. Mr. Bird: You re proposing a rather complex alternative. Ms. Fields: I m proposing a design that would not affect the beach. Mr. McGrath: I submitted the design to DEP and they had no problem with the sheeting. John Ramsey (Applied Coastal) I think there is an issue with the WPA and steel sheet piling. Phase 1 is very problematic. It should be done once. I also agree that they need beach nourishment. Over time the beach will lower. Ms. Fields submitted a prepared letter to the Board and to Mr. McGrath. Janice Hartline (President of the Association) I believe that we would be more amenable if they went right to phase 2. We never insisted on yearly beach nourishment. I wanted to clarify that. Steve (neighbor) In order to allow access we needed to have a specific plan and we never received one. We re looking for a good solution and we are willing to work with everyone to get it accomplished. Mr. McGrath: I did submit a plan to the Association showing existing vegetation and restoration on either side of the path to the them. Ms. Gladfelter: We need a copy of that. Mr. McGrath: There s been no permission granted. Why would I give you that? Mr. Mathews: Because they are saying there hadn t been any ask for permission. 13

14 Ms. Gladfelter: (to Association members) We can t force you to do that, only urge you to do that. Ms. McKay: If the Board were to approve this project you will get a special condition: an inventory and number of the plants that are coming out. Next time provide it in the beginning. Mr. Mathews: Is there opposition to doing this as one project? How long will the phases take? Mr. McGrath: If we do phase 1 it will only take a couple of weeks. Ms. McKay: How about phase 2? Mr. McGrath: That will take longer. Ms. Schumacher: Do you have to do something before phase 2? Mr. McGrath: When I see the damage, yes. Brian Wall (Attorney representing the applicant) I rose to address the access question. I think the Commission is being manipulated. They know the applicant needs a permit. This is a dynamic environment and the jetties interrupt that. The argument that beach nourishment is needed because of this reconstruction is not true. Mr. Doe met with the Association many times and asked for access and the answer was if you nourish the beach. The Association is foisting on Mr. Doe the responsibility to nourish their beach. Mr. Doe: We had meetings and phone calls with Association members and they have been great. As for the beach nourishment I am happy to pay my fair share, but to be the sole person to nourish the beach is ridiculous. I m happy to share the cost. Ms. Gladfelter: I don t believe the Association has a beach nourishment OOC. Ms. McKay: No they don t. Ms. Gladfelter: That s something we d have to consider also. Don Duncan (neighbor) There has never been voiced a condition of beach nourishment. Our concern was to avoid further scouring of the beach. Brad Butman: In response to beach nourishment. It would be better for Mr. Doe. Nourishment will protect the toe stones. I urge you to consider that. It seems logical that it will protect your wall. I haven t heard from the engineer that there is a big void. I think it could be done in one shot in the fall. Mr. Bird: It should be done in one shot. The OOC needed is a separate issue. Ms. Schumacher called for the vote. John Zizza, 82 Waterside Drive, North Falmouth, MA For permission to relocate six (6) large boulders within an area of stones to open up three channels between 20-ft and 40-ft wide through the boulder field for small craft navigation into Megansett Harbor. The hearing is continued until May 24, Shirley Rothwell, 28 Drift Road, West Falmouth, MA For permission to install a new Title 5 sewage disposal system within naturally vegetated resource area and buffer, to construct a new 6-ft x 12-ft deck, expand existing deck, install an underground electric line and the associated clearing, excavating, grading and landscaping. The hearing is continued until May 24, The Deborah Jeanne Clarke Trust 2016 (c/o Deborah Clarke), 80L Little Island Road, West Falmouth, MA For permission to raze the existing dwelling and construct a new 5-bedroom singlefamily house with attached garage, deck with stairs, porch, install walkways, Title 5 sewage disposals system, utilities, dry wells, driveway, to remove trees and invasive plants, revegetate, install mitigation plantings and the associated clearing, excavating, grading and landscaping. Ms. McKay: No comment at this time. Tom Bunker (BSS Design) presented abutter s cards. The property fronts on Falmouth Harbor. Resource areas include salt marsh, rocky shore, riprap, ground slopes up to elevation 32, VE at elevation 18 half way up the bank, 25-ft Falmouth V zone to the top of the bank, 100-ft A zone from 14

15 the salt marsh, 50-ft A zone to coastal bank and 100-ft B zone to coastal bank. The proposal is to tear down the existing house and put up a new house in basically the same place. 719-sq.ft of mitigation is required. There is an increase of impervious surface in the A zone of 143-sq.ft and 145-sq.ft in the B zone. The new septic system will be built further back and out of your jurisdiction. A number of cedar trees will be taken down. The path going down the property will be kept in the same location. Theresa Sprague (Blueflax Design) I met with Jen at the site when I discovered some problems on the property. In the OOC in 94 a condition stated that the area had to be maintained at 4-ft high. It was labeled in the land management plan presented to the Board. There was a weird grassy area that the OOC allowed. We will vegetate areas in the lawn. The vegetation is not all indigenous. The oak trees have been cut to a 4-ft height. There are invasive species on the top of the bank along with eastern red cedar and bayberry. There is also Japanese knotweed. The goals are to improve the existing wildlife habitat, enhance the resource area, eliminate the continued disturbance within the buffer strip, and provide the required mitigation. 8 trees will be removed within the buffer zone and we will plant 12 trees in their place. We will be maintaining the path. Ms. McKay: Will you remove all the cedars that have been topped? Ms. Sprague: No. Ms. McKay: How about the oaks? Ms. Sprague: Yes. They are not even worth keeping. Ms. McKay: But you re not planting any oaks? Ms. Sprague: We re proposing eastern red cedars and bayberry. Along the northern property line there will be vibernum. Ms. McKay: They know they can t maintain that to 4-ft. Ms. Sprague: Yes. Mr. Patton: No questions or comments. Mr. Mathews: No questions or comments. Ms. Gladfelter: The oak shrubs or stump sprout - you will cut them, not pull them? Ms. Sprague: Yes. Mr. Bird: No questions or comments. Ms. Schumacher: You always do a great job with your report. Mr. Bird: Move to close the hearing and take it under advisement. REQUESTS TO EXTEND THE EXISTING ORDER OF CONDITIONS Lisa Huffman, 7 Swing Lane, Falmouth, MA (DEP # ) Requests a one year extension. Ms. McKay: The applicant has requested a one year extension. Staff recommends it. Ms. Gladfelter: At the request of the applicant I move to grant a one year extension. VOTE ORDER OF CONDITIONS 55 & 57 Gunning Point Ave (Figueredo) 04/26/17 Quorum: Ms. McKay: We do not have a quorum. We will need to postpone this until next week. 15

16 190 Edgewater Drive East (Rosato) 04/26/17 Quorum: Steve, Betsy, Mary, Courtney Ms. McKay: This is the dock replacement in the A zone. I will cite the DMF letter. Ms. Gladfelter: This is pretty straight forward. They made the pilings a little bigger. Ms. Gladfelter: Move to adopt the Order of Conditions as discussed. Ms. Schumacher: Second. 78 Squibnocket Drive (Spalaris) 04/26/17 Quorum: Steve, Betsy, Mary, Courtney Ms. McKay: This is to finish the driveway. There will be the same conditions as the settlement had. Ms. Gladfelter: Move to adopt the Order of Conditions as discussed. 30 Little Harbor Road (USCG) 04/26/17 Quorum: Steve, Betsy, Mary, Courtney Ms. McKay: The questions of our Engineering Department were sent to the USCG and were addressed by them to their satisfaction. Standard Conditions will be applied. Ms. Gladfelter: Move to adopt the Order of Conditions as discussed. 256 Alder Lane (Battles) 04/26/17 Quorum: Steve, Betsy, Mary, Courtney Ms. McKay: This is the removal of the creosote wall and putting in a different one. Mr. Bird: Putting in a modular stone wall. Ms. Gladfelter: They are also removing a strip of concrete. Ms. McKay: They will add a Tupelo, re-grade and replant with native species. Mr. Patton: We asked for construction sequencing and methodology. Ms. McKay: Staff will help the engineer with choosing the plants. Ms. Gladfelter: Make sure the construction sequencing is in the record. Ms. Schumacher: Do they have Association permission? Ms. McKay: It s in the file. Mr. Bird: Move to adopt the Order of Conditions as discussed. Mr. Patton: Second. Megansett Harbor (Miller) 04/26/17 Quorum: Steve, Betsy, Mary, Courtney Ms. McKay: This is the oyster growing project in Megansett harbor. There will be the standard aquaculture requirements. Ms. Schumacher: Was it shifted for eelgrass? Ms. McKay: Yes and the shift was reflected in the application. Mr. Bird: Move to adopt the Order of Conditions as discussed. 16

17 Mr. Bird: Move to adjourn. The meeting adjourned at 10:59 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Susan Cronin, Recording Secretary 17