Meeting Minutes
March 8, 2011
PRESENT: Vivien Cook, Sandra Larsen, Stephen Smith, Linda Haspel, Steven LaBranche.
STAFF PRESENT: Deputy Natural Resource Officer Amy Usowski, Shana Brogan Administrative Assistant.
ALSO PRESENT: David Lyttle of Ryder & Wilcox, Attorney E. James Veara, Attorney Bill Riley, Tim Brady of East Cape Engineering, Maurice Boisvert, Sean Riley of Coastal Engineering, Tim Klink of Coastal Land Design, Mike Panaccione, Doug Scott, Guy Fisher, Linda Fisher, Stephanie Sequin of Ryder and Wilcox, George Hampson, Marcy Ericson, Dave Kulis of Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Grace Anne Weitzer, Stephen Weitzer, Karin Antin.
Chairman Smith opened the meeting at 6:01 P.M.
Request for Determination of Applicability filed by Ginny Chenoweth. Applicant proposes a cedar platform deck at property located at 360 Route 6, Map 21, Parcel 81.
Mike Panaccione represented the applicant and explained the project saying that he came to the Conservation Commission for the house adjacent for the same project and now the applicant would like a 22.5 x11 platform deck on existing lawn area. Amy Usowski asked what the spacing would be and Mike Panaccione replied that it would be .5 inches - the identical project as the property next to it.
Steven LaBranche MOVED approved a negative determination for reason three, Linda Haspel SECONDED.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
6:08 P.M.
Amended Order of Conditions filed by Joanne Scott. Applicant proposes amended order to include repair and maintenance of coastal stairs located at 49 Longstreet Lane, Cottage #5. Map 10, Parcel 343.
A relative represented the applicant. The representative said the bank protection has been destroyed; the stairs are no longer usable and need to be repaired. Amy Usowski encouraged the applicant to fix the sand bags as it has been approved last year, and they are running out of time to fix them this year, if they are left much longer they will be a huge mess on the beach. The representative replied there was an ongoing conversation with Anchor Marine, but did not know the time frame for when the work would be done. Amy Usowski stated that if it is determined that the stairs are to be moved, the applicant has to come back to the commission. The representative said there were no plans to relocate the stairs. Sandra Larsen asked if this was a replacement of the stairs. Amy Usowski said that this is the same materials being used in the same
place and that the structure is current tipped over. Sandra asked what the construction protocol would be for the project because they were using an old plan. The representative said they would follow the same plan that has been approved. Amy Usowski said that they could condition the new amended orders. Chairman Smith said that if the project is more than 50% then it is no longer maintenance, it is replacement. Amy Usowski said that when she first talked about project she thought it was a few things to be fixed but with the recent storms it is now unusable and she can condition a meeting before work starts, or the applicant could come back in two weeks. Linda Haspel asked when work would start. The representative stated that he did not know. Linda then said that this was a very small window for using the beach for work. Chairman Smith said that it seemed there was a lot of guessing and loose ends and the Commission should consider conditioning that if more than 50% is to be
rebuilt it becomes a new Notice of Intent filing.
Vivien Cook MOVED to continue the hearing, Steven LaBranche SECONDED.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
6:24 P.M.
Amended Order of Conditions filed by Silver Spring Beach Association. Applicant proposes an amended order to relocate existing stairway due to bank erosion at property located at Silver Spring Beach Road, Map 04.
Tim Brady represented the applicant and said the stairway was approved in 2005. Since then the bank has eroded and the proposal is to move the stairway landward twelve feet however, since the filing more erosion has occurred. Tim Brady said the stairs would be taken apart in sections and the same components would be used and he would like to collapse the top of the bank and add 1,000 yards of fill to the bank, and then put in the stairway. Amy Usowski said that she would read abutter Helen Velovsin’s faxed letter and that the same pole could be used and could be an amendment but collapsing the bank is a lot more of a disturbance than originally thought. Tim Brady replied that the Dunes Beach Association had the same project and a new Notice of Intent would be more paperwork and as for impact on the bank, it cannot be more
unstable than it currently is. Amy Usowski said that this project is different than Dunes Beach because it has effects on abutters, and there is a question of land ownership.
Chairman Smith read abutter Helen Velovsin’s letter aloud.
Tim Brady asked if he would be filing a new Notice of Intent or keeping the Amended Order of Conditions. Amy Usowski commented on the construction protocol and how it was proposed not to affect the abutters. Tim Brady replied that knocking off the bank will get more time with the staircase and the fill will disappear no matter what is done and adding fill will help the property owners. Amy Usowski said that fill will help and if the top of the bank is left as it is, it will fall eventually. Chairman Smith asked if the bank had moved back since the project’s plan had been drawn. Tim Brady replied that the top had not, but the bottom had eroded significantly. Amy Usowski asked if the Commission wanted an amended order or re-filing and told Tim he would still have to provide construction protocol. Sandra Larsen asked Amy Usowski about the
requirements for an amendment and said that it crafts itself to be a Notice of Intent. Tim Brady replied that it can be argued that knocking off the top of the bank will help to stabilize it more. Linda Haspel asked if this was the best way to protect the bank. Tim Brady replied that the best way to protect the bank would be to build a stone revetment. Sandra Larsen said that the Commission needed assurances about the project. Chairman Smith said that the cornice will fall at some point. Tim Brady replied that when the augers go in, they go down fine, but once come out won’t be destabilizing because it is already as unstable as it can be. Chairman Smith asked if all the work would be done from the top, and it was replied that some work would need to be done from the bottom of the bank as well. Chairman Smith then asked the Commissioners what they would like and they determined an Amended Order was acceptable. Tim Brady said he had no problem getting a narrative and
protocol for the Commission.
Karen Anton an abutter to the proposed project, addressed the Commission saying that she agreed there needed to be access to the beach and that she is not part of the association and is concerned how the stairway impacts the bank and noted it is the most elaborate stairway on the bay, the benches on the stairway get a lot of use. She said It is attractive nuisance and asked if it could be minimized.
A second abutter spoke saying he had been in the area since 1962 and that the stairs are sturdy and will hold up well for a longer time and he didn’t think they could be improved upon.
Tim Brady said that he didn’t think the stairway was wider than other stairways and it has remained because of its construction. Chairman Smith said that the previous stairway had more pilings and the weight going up and down it will not affect the bank and the amount of erosion has been great all over the past five years and agrees with Tim Brady that the design of the stairs could be helping to support the bank.
Karin Anton replied that the design of the staircase should be made for going up and down only and not have benches.
Chairman Smith said that the stairs at Nauset Light Beach get a lot of foot traffic and they would collapse if the traffic was the case, however it is the wave impact that affects them.
The abutter then questioned the property line.
Linda Haspel MOVED to accept a continuance, Vivien Cook SECONDED.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
7:17 P.M.
Notice of Intent filed by Linda Novak. Applicant proposes construction of additions and renovations to an existing family dwelling within 100 feet of the top of a coastal bank at property located at 95 Bay View Drive, Map 10, Parcel 277.
Stephanie Sequin from Ryder and Wilcox represented the applicant. She said the house was built in 1953 and that the proposed addition would be in the footprint of the remaining deck, it would be on sonotubes and one story. She also noted that the deck would be reconfigured. Construction would be a smaller footprint and farther back replacing roof and siding of the garage. They would use silt fence as work limit and the existing deck will be staging area and debris will be covered in containers. Any disturbed area would be replanted with native materials. The house would remain five bedroom and septic the same. Amy Usowski said most of the area already disturbed if possible use vegetation taken out for construction and re-plant and there would be an Order of Conditions for crushed stone for the shower. Sandra Larsen had a question about the
driveway being paved and wanted to make sure the driveway would not be resurfaced, and if anything is to be done to the driveway the applicant is to contact the Conservation Commission.
Steven LaBranche MOVED to approve, Linda Haspel SECONDED.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
Notice of Intent by Mary and Charles Cataldo. Applicant proposes extending an existing stone revetment at property located at 85 Sparrow Road, Map 4, Parcel 199.
Dave Lajoie of FELCO Engineering represented the applicant and explained that presently the revetment there is erosion near the town property and they are proposing to extend the revetment 48 feet to protect the septic and leeching area and then covering it up. All the work would be done from the property. Amy Usowski asked why not use snow fencing. Dave Lajoie responded that there is continual erosion and they want to do it now opposed to later down the line and he did not specify an amount for beach nourishment but it can be done every year. Amy Usowski also said that they can add a benchmark and some snow fencing could create a dune at the top. Amy Usowski then said that the main point was the impact on abutters. Linda Haspel asked if the town took any stance on the subject and if they were concerned. Amy Usowski said she had not
heard much from the town and just about stabilization. Linda Haspel asked if there were any other possible solutions. Dave Lajoie replied that it will be the same scenario as the previous revetment and that it will be covered so that you can see what you see today. Amy Usowski asked if fiberolls would work as they could also be covered. Dave Lajoie replied that there wouldn’t be much difference. Sandra Larsen asked about the top of the revetment as some was exposed. Amy Usowski said that the applicant has an ongoing Order of Conditions to maintain the revetment. Dave Lajoie said the applicant is not neglecting it, it is just this past year. Amy Usowski asked if the applicant would be amenable to monitoring. Dave Lajoie replied that if they want to work with the town as to how much is being eroded they can. Amy Usowski said, if the applicant will have to be adding a lot of fill every year why don’t they just do that instead. Chairman Smith asked Dave Lajoie if he and the
applicant were hoping to buy twelve years. Dave Lejoie replied that yes, at the rate it is going. Chairman Smith replied that the plants are doing a good job of breaking wave action and asked if more stabilization could be created by adding plants to the top of the bank. Amy Usowski said they may need to nourish the top of the bank. Chairman Smith asked if the applicant could give it a try and Dave Lajoie replied yes. Chairman Smith said that the applicant should establish plant growth now so the plantings will be mature once erosion occurs in that area. Sandra Larsen wanted to clarify that the applicant should know about their discussion and the requirement of beach nourishment. Amy Usowski reiterated that if the benchmark is exposed the applicant will have to add more sand in addition to their annual beach nourishment. And that if it is uncovered in a bad nor’easter it can be a hair-trigger and if because of a bad storm and if there is damage to the revetment and to the
town then the applicant will have to work with the town.
Steven LaBranche MOVED to accept, Vivien Cook SECONDED.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
8:20 PM
Notice of Intent filed by Donald Anderson. ~Applicant wishes to complete scientific research to evaluate possible mitigation of harmful algal blooms by sediment re-suspension at property located at the Salt Pond off State Highway, Map 12, Parcel 319.
Dave Kulis of Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution represented the applicant and explanted that they received funding from NOAA to investigate the causes of algae blooms every year in Salt Pond. He continued to say that they have worked In Salt Pond since 2003 and the project will be overseen by natural resource officers and the project will consist of six grid areas, three controlled and three experimental and a hydraulic rake will disturb the sediments. The access to the experimental site will be using 16” x 16” blocks in order to not re-suspend the sediments which is crucial for accurate data. The assessment would be done on a bi-weekly basis. Linda Haspel asked what impact the project would have on the resource. Dave Kulis replied that the impact would be similar to the rakes that are used for shellfishing. Amy Usowski
noted that the applicant would have to coordinate with shellfish planting. Sandra Larsen expressed concern about the plastics being used in the project and asked if different ones could be used. Dave Kulis replied that they are opting for lexan which would be in the water for one hour and they can use polyethalene as well asked as far as cores they will put nitex windows and they need to use PVC because they have the right coupling. Sandra Larsen replied that she preferred HDC which has a similar coupling. Dave Kulis replied that it came down to a cost issue and the lexan box will be above the water mark and the stepping stones would be pulled up in June.
Steven LaBranche MOVED to approve, Sandra Larsen SECONDED.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
Continuation of hearing on Notice of Intent filed by Jill & Daniel Rubalcaba. Applicant proposes removing of existing dwelling and construction of a new dwelling at property located at 47 Longstreet Lane, Map 10, Parcel 342A.
Tim Brady represented the applicant and recalled from the last hearing there was a question of the Order of Condition ‘no new coastal structures’ if the house is rebuilt however, according to DEP the house is in the same area and the building was already moved back so it will qualify for future protection. Tim Brady also said that the Board of Health required a septic upgrade to include an improved treatment area. Amy Usowski said that she had no concerns and that she also talked to DEP and if the house is the same size and in the same area it is ok, but if it were bigger and closer to the bank then it would qualify for no new coastal structure. Chairman Smith said that there is really no increase in the footprint. Tim Brady replied that they were going from one to two stories. It was asked about the work limit and that
there is almost a second driveway, and it was asked to move the limit in more. Tim Brady replied that the current limit of work was necessary to allow the bigger current construction machines in during the demolition of the house and there could be an Order of Condition that there is to be replanting of disturbed areas. Steve LaBranche asked if there was any excavation for the septic system. Tim Brady replied there would be a 4’ x 4’ area excavated. Sandra Larsen asked what would happen with the Title V system. Tim Brady said that the system would stay as it is.
Vivien Cook MOVED to accept the project, Steve LaBranche SECONDED.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
8:47 P.M.
Continuation of hearing on Notice of Intent filed by Maurice J. Boisvert. Applicant proposes to construct, license and maintain a seasonal pier, ramp, and float at property located at Town Cove, 80 Old State Highway Map 20, Parcel 119.
David Lyttle of Ryder and Wilcox represented the applicant along with George Hansen of Woods Hole Group who conducted the shellfish survey. David Lyttle addressed what Amy Usowski brought up and said that it will not alter the sub straight and that there will be no I’m pact by traffic, the drainage will not be affected and he proposed prior removal of the shellfish to a new location as approved by Amy Usowski. There will be float-stops installed. George Hansen then said that the area proposed for the dock is very healthy because there are many invertebrates that live there, and that there were many juvenile shellfish of all sizes and at a reasonable density, the survey came to approximately one shellfish per square foot, or nine per square yard, predominately quahogs and the sediment there was very compact and there was a
very adequate amount of shellfish in the area. Amy Usowski asked if the area where the dock is proposed would ever be restored to a shellfish habitat. It was replied that she shellfish could invade the pilings. David Lyttle responded that he is only proposing to remove the shellfish where the six pilings are to go in. Linda Haspel asked what impact the dock would have and David Lyttle replied that it would not interfere where shellfish could go and dig and it is in everyone’s best interest to not disturb the bottom. Chairman Smith asked if the applicant would consider painting the bottom of his boat with a different solution. The applicant replied he would be happy to. David Lyttle replied that the dock would be a minimum of four feet high so as not to damage the salt marsh and it can be put in that the pier can be taken out because of damage to the salt marsh. Sandra Larsen said that they had not addressed the eel grass. It was replied that there was no eel grass. Sandra
Larsen replied that it was sad there was no eel grass in our marshes and coves and there are concerns to the wetlands protection act and the use of pesticides to past projects has made it fragmented and this is just one more project and it is difficult because there is not a lot of backing with the town By-Law. Maurice Boisvert replied that he had invested a lot to re-plant his property with native vegetation and excited about what the outcome will be and it will hopefully encourage others to do the same. Sandra Larsen replied that the changes to the Town Cove are a cumulative effect. Linda Haspel asked how this would impact the shellfish. Woods Hole group replied that it cannot be predicted, they won’t die from shading and it is providing that the homeowner is responsible.
Vivien Cook MOVED to approve, Steven LaBranche SECONDED.
Three in Favor, One Opposed, One Abstention.
Motion Carried.
There was discussion about a follow-up shellfish survey.
9:30 P.M.
Continuation of Hearing on Notice of Intent filed by Frank and Janet Bianco. Applicant proposes demolition and reconstruction of a single-family dwelling within the 100’ Buffer Zone to a Coastal Bank at property located at 290 Saltworks Road, Map 04, Parcel 005A.
Sean Riley and Attorney Veara represented the applicant and recalled from the last hearing that there was discussion as to why alternatives were not looked at. They said they looked at consolidation house and it didn’t work with the topography and that a private consultant surveyed for potential impact to the bank and he reported there would not be because there was a revetment installed. Sean Riley said he would be glad to incorporate drywells. Amy Usowski recalled from the Town of Eastham By-Law that the project needed to demonstrate that there were no technically feasible alternatives and currently there are two stories on top of the garage, they can not go into the undisturbed area. Amy Usowski and Chairman Smith misunderstood the height requirements for building in the project. Linda Haspel said if the house was lower and Attorney
Veara said that they are back to condition #2 from the alternatives analysis presented to the Commission and the private consultant found no adverse impacts. Chairman Smith said that the property is subject to storm flowage and if the revetment is overtopped and there is flooding there will be a bigger box in the bank keeping water from being absorbed. Sean Riley said that the site is not in mapped velocity elevation and that the Cape Cod Bay flood would hit the lower third of the revetment and this is where the V-Zone is mapped and the revetment is approved to go to elevation 18.
Chairman Smith said that this house is proposed to be quadruple the size of the current house. Sandra Larsen said she thought the intent of the by-law and general sense of it gives wiggle room and that the project does not accommodate CZM for no adverse impact and that it is counter intuitive to make it larger and doesn’t speak to the thought process for down the road and also they can’t say there won’t be an impact if there is flooding and most of the time with other project they can be worked through with the applicants. Attorney Veara replied that they had spoken with the applicants about the future and the revetment and the applicant did downscale the project and the concerns and thought of the Conservation Commission have been taken into account. Attorney Veara continued saying that they have met the standards and the
private professional said they were met. Vivien Cook said that they are going to a much larger project and she doesn’t feel that there will not be something compromised.
Attorney Bill Riley representing the abutters of the project said that the reason the Town of Eastham has a by-law is to determine that there are no technically demonstrated adverse effects and that the garage does not have to be 20 feet wide and the applicant has created generous spaces for themselves and there has been a lot of talk but no action taken by the owner and he thinks they should go back and tell the owners to squeeze the building in and come back or the commission won’t approve the project.
Sean Riley said there were no less adverse effects and Amy Usowski said Mr. Berman spoke to the state act. Amy Usowski said the Commission can decide on the activities in the buffer zone. Linda Haspel said the Commission has not been shown any smaller homes that would have a lesser impact; they were given a large structure and have been shown no smaller plans. Chairman Smith said he has not seen a technically unfeasible alternative. Attorney Veara said that it doesn’t mean one has to pear down or make the structure smaller and they have expressed the concerns to everyone and the independent professional Greg Berman said there was no impact.
Amy Usowski said that in most filings she has talked with the homeowners and she was disturbed that she had not heard from them.
Attorney Veara said that it was hard for the property owner because of the tension with abutters and it was hard for them to deal with. Sandra Larsen clarified that speaking with the homeowners directly may have made the process smoother.
Linda Haspel MOVED to deny the project under the Town of Eastham By-Law, Sandra Larsen SECONDED.
Sandra Larsen – In Favor of Denial
Linda Haspel – In Favor of Denial
Vivien Cook – In Favor of Denial
Stephen Smith – In Favor of Denial
Steven LaBranche – Opposed to Denial
Motion Carried.
Steven LaBranche MOVED to approve the project under the Wetlands Protection Act, Vivien Cook SECONDED.
Sandra Larsen –Opposed to Approval
Linda Haspel –Opposed to Approval
Vivien Cook -In Favor of Approval
Stephen Smith –In Favor of Approval
Steven LaBranche –In Favor of Approval
Motion Carried.
10:25 P.M.
Continuation of Hearing on Notice of Intent filed by Gary and Jan Ross. ~Applicant proposes the construction of a 12’x 20’ shed; to add 50 cubic yards of sand to fill around the foundation, and to provide plantings and snow fencing for stabilization at property located at 345 Harmes Way, Map 1, Parcel 110.
Tim Klink of Coastal Land Design represented the applicant and said the site was staked and a pre-built shed will be on concrete blocks and be 8” from the ground. The shed has been downsized to a 10’ x 11’ Amy Usowski noted that there was one more bare site for the shed but the traffic to access it would cause more of a disturbance. Chairman Smith asked if the applicant would have a problem with monitoring. Tim Klink thought the applicants would be ok with monitoring but wasn’t sure if it came down to being removed and said the shed could be lifted up and blocks could be added. Amy Usowski said she was not worried about the vegetative cover. Sandra Larsen asked why not put it in front of the house and Tim Klink replied that it would be too close to the cedar tree and possibly swallowed by the house. Amy Usowski
said they can condition that they can move the shed and Tim Klink said they wouldn’t be opposed to moving it.
Linda Haspel MOVED to approve, Vivien Cook SECONDED.
SO VOTED UNANMIOUSLY.
Amy Usowski reiterated that there would be a condition that the Commission could have the shed moved or removed and Sandra Larsen asked if the vegetation on the site could be a little thicker.
Small Business
1651 Committee Nomination
Vivien Cook MOVED to nominate Steven LaBranche, Linda Haspel SECONDED.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
10:40 P.M.
Steven LaBranche MOVED to adjourn, Linda Haspel SECONDED.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
Respectfully Submitted,
Shana Brogan
| 
