EASTHAM CONSERVATION COMMISSION
27 October 2009
MINUTES
PRESENT: Glenn Collins, David Hoerle, Steven LaBranche, Steve Smith, Sandra Larsen, Dennis Murley, Lorraine Giovinazzo
STAFF PRESENT: Deputy Natural Resource Officer Amy Usowski.
ALSO PRESENT: Shirley Anne Lotuff, Thomas M. Micelli, Judith Cannon, Chris Norgeot, Henry Lind, Don Milbier, Elaine LaChapelle, Kathy McQuown, Michael Maglathlin, Judy Williams, Tim Brady, Faith Nyser, Al Holliman, Elizabeth Kelsey, Michael Kelsey, Joseph Eager, Jim Knowles.
Chairman Murley opened the meeting at 7:00 P.M.
The first order of business was approval of the Minutes of 22 September 2009. Mr. Collins MOVED and Mr. Hoerle SECONDED the Motion to approve the Minutes of
22 September 2009 as submitted.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
Subsequently, Mr. LaBranche MOVED to approve the Minutes of the Executive Session dated 22 September 2009. Mr. Hoerle SECONDED the Motion.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
Deputy Usowski reviewed for the Commissioners a letter received from the Compact of Conservation Trusts regarding a new Conservation Restriction on a 2.73 acre parcel of land on 170 Old Farm Lane. She said that the Compact requests that the Eastham Conservation Commission give their support and approval and recommend this to the Board of Selectmen.
Henry Lind was present representing the Eastham Conservation Foundation, a partner and member of the Compact. He explained that Conservation Restrictions allow a significant adjustment in the value of the property which allows a real estate tax savings
to the property owner in exchange for the restriction promising that the owner will not develop the property and leave it as Open Space. He said that this particular piece of property is a very important wetland area. He said that this will also need to be approved by the Board of Selectmen and the Board of Assessors.
After brief discussion, Mr. Hoerle MOVED and Mr. LaBranche SECONDED the Motion to support and approval for this Conservation Restriction on 170 Old Farm Lane.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
7:10 P.M. Request for Extension Permit, Connor, DEP SE 19-1247, 4 Jean’s Way, Map 07, Parcel 503.
Deputy Usowski told the Commissioners that the Applicants were requesting a 3-year Extension Permit so they could have additional time to complete the rock revetment construction work and some of the remaining Special Condition items. She said they have been nourishing and the site is nicely vegetated.
Mr. Hoerle MOVED and Mr. Smith SECONDED the Motion to grant a 3-year Extension Permit for DEP SE 19-1247.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
7:15 P.M. Notice of Intent filed by Jessica Strauss, 31 (Rear) Martha Avenue, Map 10, Parcel 202.
Chairman Murley announced this hearing. This proposal is for the installation of 100 linear feet of sand-drift fence, removal, re-building and relocation of a stairway on the Coastal Bank, and nourishment of the Coastal Bank with 200 cy. of sand. Mr. Collins recused himself from this hearing.
Chris Norgeot of Anchor Marine, Inc. was present for the Applicant and told the Commissioners that there is erosion at the toe of the bank which has been there for some time. He said Ms. Strauss is looking to remedy the problem by filling in the hillside, re-establishing the slope, installing a sand-drift fence at the base of the Toe of the Bank about 4' out and while there, re-building old stairs that have been rebuilt once before and this time she would like to move the stairway to a better spot on the property which is more accessible to her and on her property as currently, they are just off the property line.
Mr. Norgeot said the stair would be pressure treated except for the bottom two posts. He said the sand-drift fence will be non-pressure-treated lumber. He said that when the sand is brought in it will be clean, coarse sand which will be trucked into the Campground Beach parking lot and then brought down the beach in a rubber-tired front end loader. It will be place on the hillside with a track excavator and the last thing they will do is to install the sand-drift fence.
Deputy Usowski said she agrees with everything Mr. Norgeot presented. She agrees with the amount of 200 cy. of sand to fill in the bank. She reminded the Commissioners that they have already seen a plan for re-vegetating the bank from Seth Wilkinson on a separate Order of Conditions. The filings just happened to get scheduled for different meetings. She said that if the new location is approved for the stairs, the area where the stairs are presently located should be vegetated.
There was brief discussion about the planting plan.
There was no further discussion and Chairman Murley closed this hearing. Mr. Smith MOVED and Mr. LaBranche SECONDED the Motion with Order of Conditions 1-18, 19, 20, 21, 25 for the bottom two posts, 27, 29 to include planting where the old set of stairs is, 31 one time of 200 cubic yards, not annually, 33, 34 nourishment on an as-needed basis, with request 35, 36.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. Collins returned to the hearing room.
7:30 P.M. Request for an Amended Order of Conditions filed by Peter and Joyce Weinman, 40 Rogers Lane, Map 21, Parcel 071.
Chairman Murley announced this hearing. The Applicants’ propose moving the location of the existing driveway from the southwest corner of the lot to the northwest corner of the lot and to re-plant the existing area with native plants.
Don Milbier was present on behalf of the Weinmans and reviewed the plans with the Commissioners. Deputy Usowski showed photos of the site. Mr. Milbier said the driveway re-location will allow the Weinmans to come in off the end of the cul-de-sac. He said they would first take out the invasives, then re-locate the driveway and move the shed to straddle the 100' line. He said the old driveway area will be re-planted with native plants.
Deputy Usowski said there is a list of fifty-three plants which are to be planted where the existing driveway is now. She said there are a few live trees where the proposed driveway is to be placed but the area is mostly invasives and a some of the trees are dead. She said that this proposal would go along with Seth Wilkinson’s plan for the site which has already been approved. She asked Mr. Milbier how much fill he thought he would have to bring in to level off the parking area at the top.
Mr. Milbier said it is hard to exactly calculate the amount of fill. He said they want to make sure the water is addressed and to make sure the gravel is not displaced when people drive up there. Deputy Usowski said the erosion on the site is pretty bad presently and asked Mr. Milbier to see that the erosion control barriers are fixed.
Commissioner Hoerle asked what the existing driveway material is where the catch basin outflow is. Mr. Milbier said the driveway material is gravel with probably some stone dust. Deputy Usowski said its hard to tell since the driveway has been there a long time but the Applicants can be encouraged to use larger size stone. Mr. Milbier said he thinks the catch basin is probably a dry well, but that will be examined. Deputy Usowski said if it is found to lead somewhere it can be blocked off so nothing goes into the Cove.
Mr. Smith and Mr. Milbier had conversation about the view easement and Deputy Usowski reminded Mr. Milbier that even if someone has a view easement in their deed they still need to get Conservation Commission approval to trim.
Shirley Lotuff came to the table and told the Commission that the property does not flood that often and the cul-de-sac doesn’t flood under normal rain circumstances. She said that the plan dated 1/29 and approved by the Commission does not agree with the plan being presented. She said there is a well easement that is not shown on the new plan. She said the well easement belongs to an abutter so that in the event their drinking water is not potable they have this other site to use for drinking water in the future. She said she doesn’t know whether Mr. Milbier’s plan puts the driveway on top of this well easement area.
Mr. Milbier said the he believes that the new plan does show the well easement and he believes that the existing dry well catch basin is either within the well easement or straddles it because it is right on the edge, and the driveway is proposed to be north of all that so it doesn’t effect the well easement.
There was discussion about which trees would need to be removed. Ms. Lotuff said that the existing driveway was formerly all gravel and the sand which was put on top of it was from underneath the house when it was excavated and raised up. She said that everything which was underneath the house was put on the driveway and that is what is eroding.
Mr. Milbier said that if this proposal is approved, any and all of the gravel, sand or any composite material will be used in the new driveway area and the existing area will have soil and plantings, but if the catch basin at the top doesn’t get fixed, the erosion at the east side of the right-of-way isn’t going to go away.
Ms. Lotuff said that could be repaired without re-locating the driveway. She said that re-locating the driveway means taking town a substantial number of trees which actually block the winds and are a buffer for the people who live there. Mr. Milbier said he thinks that 90% of this material is coming out because it is invasive and dead material. Deputy Usowski said the approved Plant Management Plan sites the removal of invasive plants within the 100' Buffer Zone. Ms. Lotuff said she doesn’t care about invasive plants and Bittersweet, she cares about a Cedar and Maple trees. She said that things have been done which caused the erosion and it wasn’t eroding before then. She said that the driveway doesn’t have to be moved because of erosion and was perfectly fine with the stone that was on
it.
Mr. Collins commented that he feels the new plan addresses the issues on the site and getting rid of invasives and planting some native plants is positive. He said he has no problem with the plan Mr. Milbier has presented.
Chairman Murley commented that if this project is approved, the material taken from the existing driveway would need to be examined to make sure it was suitable to be
re-used in the area of the proposed driveway and if it is not, it should be hauled away. He said the ratio of trees being removed to trees being replaced, along with other plants, is good and this is in addition to the existing approved planting plan. He said that also, all of this work is toward the 75' to 100' and part of the approved plan is to develop a “No Mow” zone where it was previously all lawn and re-establish more of a Buffer Zone between the house and Town Cove.
There were no further questions or comments and Chairman Murley closed this hearing. Mr. Collins MOVED to amend Order of Conditions SE 19-1334 to include the plan #1 entitled “Weinman Residence, 40 Rogers Lane, Eastham, MA 02642", dated 10/05/09, prepared by Don Milbier Designs and the addition of Condition #38 stating that no hardening is to be used in the new driveway location and prior to placing any material from the old driveway into the new location the material is to be inspected by Deputy Usowski or another Natural Resource Officer to insure that it contains no hardening or blue stone dust, and Conditions #39 stating that if the catch basin is found to have a pipe or any type of outflow to the Town Cove, it is to be blocked off and the catch basin should be maintained on a bi-annual basis. Ms. Giovinazzo SECONDED the Motion.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
8:22 P.M. Request for Determination of Applicability filed by Thomas Micelli, 25 Cove Road, Map 18, Parcel 042.
Chairman Murley announced this hearing. Mr. Collins and Ms. Larsen recused themselves from this hearing.
Mr. Micelli was present and explained to the Commission his proposal to expand their kitchen over the existing driveway and deck at the above address.
Deputy Usowski said the work will take place 75-100' in the Buffer Zone to the Isolated Freshwater Wetland in an already disturbed area. She said it seems that this area is being fertilized and told Mr. Micelli this is not permissible.
There was no further discussion and Ms. Giovinazzo MOVED a Negative Determination for Reason #3 with a condition stating that no fertilization is to occur within the 100' Buffer Zone. Mr. Hoerle SECONDED the Motion.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
8:28 P.M. Request for Determination of Applicability filed by Kathleen McQuown, 70 Nickerson Road, Map 14, Parcel 128.
Chairman Murley announced this hearing. Elaine LaChapelle was the Applicant’s representative. The Applicant was also present. Ms. LaChapelle reviewed the proposal for various improvements to the house including a new concrete wall to support the kitchen, two new deck, new footings for the sun porch and decks, and a staircase within 100' of Herring Pond. There will be no excavation needed other than the footings for the decks.
Deputy Usowski said the work is approximately 75' from the pond. She said the work does encroach into the A.C.E.C. and it is up to the Commissioners to decide whether the work will impact the A.C.E.C. Deputy Usowski showed photos of the site.
There was some discussion about the concrete wall and the limit of work.
There was no further discussion and Chairman Murley closed this hearing. Mr. Hoerle MOVED a Negative Determination for Reason #3. Ms. Giovinazzo SECONDED the Motion.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
8:38 P.M. Notice of Intent filed by the Ridley Family Trust, 16 Sherwood Road, Map 113, Parcel 133.
Chairman Murley announced this hearing. Tim Brady of East Cape Engineering, Inc. was present for the Applicant and explained the proposal to construct three small additions as well as general renovations to the existing cottage at the above site. He told the Commissioners that this cottage is part of a condominium association which appeared before the Commission several years ago and were approved to construct a stone revetment in front of the five cottages. He said that this cottage is directly in the middle of the five.
Mr. Brady continued that all of the roof runoff will be directed to gutters and downspouts and the Limit of Work is quite tight. Mr. Brady said that for the two smallest additions closest to the water they are proposing crawl-space foundations which will require an excavation of approximately 4' with a frost footing. He said that they are proposing a full foundation for the addition closest to the road to simply give the owners some storage since they presently have none at all. He said they actually want to put some of the utilities in it. He said it will be about 8'x10' on the corner of the building.
Mr. Brady said the Coastal Bank is stable and well vegetated. He said the entire project is within the 100' Buffer Zone and the 50' line goes through approximately two thirds of the building but nothing they are proposing will have any impact on the bank. He said that no vegetation will be removed other than some minor shrubs.
Deputy Usowski said that the two interests of the WPA dealing with Coastal Bank are Storm Damage Protection and Flood Control. She said a large portion of the work is within 25' of the Top of the Coastal Bank and the other addition which is proposed to be on a full foundation is just over the 50' mark. She said this cottage is pre-WPA. Deputy Usowski said the cottage is about 600-700 sf. now and the proposed additions are around 175 sf. She said that her concern is how they intend to excavate the 4' crawl space and what type of machinery they intend to use because they are so close to the Coastal BAnk
Mr. Brady said the existing deck will be gone when they do the excavation for the crawl spaces so there will be room to stockpile the material and they can use a little, mini excavator and for the full foundation he said the material will be removed from the site. He said there is a parking area to the left-hand side of the building and all the equipment can be stockpiled in that area. He said that all of the rest of the construction will be done by hand.
There was some discussion about the need for the crawl-space foundation and the necessity for frost protection and whether or not the vegetation by the deck would be removed.
Chairman Murley said the Commission likes to see the Limit of Work as tight as possible to the building and asked that Mr. Brady change the Limit of Work from 5' to 3'.
There was no further discussion and Chairman Murley closed this hearing. It was MOVED by Mr. Collins and SECONDED by Mr. Smith to issue an Order of Conditions for this project with Conditions 1-18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 3' off the deck and no existing vegetation is to be removed. There shall be no alteration seaward of the existing deck, 23, 26, 27, 29, 32 extra sand to be taken off site, 33 all debris is to be removed from the site daily and kept in covered containers on site, 35, 37 seaward of the existing deck,
38 the two additions closest to the water are to be on crawl-space foundations.
9:00 P.M. Request for an Amended Order of Conditions, Carlson,
DEP SE 19-1347, 60 Rogers Lane, Map 21, Parcel 069.
Chairman Murley announced this hearing. The Applicant is requesting after-the-fact approval for re-paving the existing driveway which was not approved by the Commission as part of the installation of a new sewer line for a new septic system.
Tim Brady was present for this Applicant and explained to the Commission that by the time they were done with the job, the pavement had either been dug up or broken up by the trucks. He pointed out a note on the approved plan which states “pavement to be cut and re-paved as required”, so he said he thinks there was some discussion about what was going to happen with the driveway. He said there was also a catch basin which was going to be removed and it was.
Mr. Brady said there are not two small paved aprons which run off the southerly side of the driveway into relatively well-vegetated areas. He said he thinks this is an appropriate way to handle the runoff from there. He said the last time he was at the site there was a little erosion on the right-hand side of the driveway due to the heavy rains. He said it is actually outside the Buffer Zone but he has spoken with Mr. Carlson and doesn’t know if he’s taken care of that. He said the entire driveway was re-paved as part of the septic system upgrade. He said he feels that the drainage is being handled in a reasonable way at this point, flowing directly over the surface to the vegetated areas adjacent to the driveway.
Chairman Murley said the Commission had very specific conversation with Ms. Siddell of East Cape that if the driveway was not repairable it would be replaced with gravel or shell. Mr. Brady said he was not aware of that discussion. He said it is not in the Order of Conditions and he requested to review the Minutes of that meeting.
Ms. Giovinazzo said she had concerns with the mowing and it had been specifically stated that only a 6" trench area in the driveway would be disturbed. Mr. Brady said that Mr. Carlson has stopped mowing to some extent and would stop mowing to a greater extent if that’s what needs to be done. Ms. Giovinazzo said there is a problem with the water coming down the driveway and it has absolutely flattened the vegetation on it’s way to the Cove.
Deputy Usowski said an Enforcement Order was issued on this project requiring the Applicant to appear before th Commission but no fine was levied because on the approved plan it did say “on an as needed basis” so the language was not clear; but, as to the question of whether this was an allowable activity, the original legal ad for this project made no mention of driveway improvements or re-paving. It was only advertised for the installation of a new septic tank within 100' of the Coastal Bank and the abandonment and filling with sand of the existing cesspool; so, the actual activity of removing and re-paving was not a legal activity.
Mr. Brady said he thinks that it certainly was recognized that some paving was going to be required in order to do the repair, so he’s not sure the entire activity is illegal. He said he would like to continue the hearing to have a chance to look at the Minutes. He asked if the Commission was looking toward having Mr. Carlson rip up the driveway and replace it with gravel. Chairman Murley said there are no promises, but asked if there is any way they can come to a 2:1 ratio of mitigation which represents the paved area within the Buffer Zone.
Mr. Hoerle said he is still concerned with the leach of the tar material and asked if there is a way to seal the pavement so that it will not leach. Mr. Smith said that a paved driveway needs to be maintained and resealed continually with toxins that the Commission is trying to keep from going in the water. He said if there is a no maintenance condition, the driveway will have to be pulled up in ten or fifteen years anyway because it will be all checked and broken. He said he feels that a lot of time and work went into this driveway and it doesn’t belong there.
Deputy Usowski showed photos of the driveway and the catch basin where the runoff is supposed to be going. She told Mr. Brady that a lot of the water does go into this catch basin, but a lot of it shoots right past it and ends up closer to Town Cove. She asked Mr Brady if he knew why it was placed where it is and he said he did not know. He said he wasn’t involved with the driveway and didn’t know it had been done until the owner requested a Certificate of Compliance. He said he will speak with Mr. Carlson and see what can be done.
There were no further questions or comments and Mr. Brady requested a continuance of this hearing. Ms. Giovinazzo MOVED and Mr. Smith SECONDED the Motion to continue this hearing until 24 November 2009.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
The Commission took a 5-minutes break at this time.
9:15 P.M. Conservation Violation, Nyser, 50 Bayview Road, Map 19, Parcel 016.
Deputy Usowski told the Commission she had received a call about some
clear cutting at 50 Bayview Road, within 50' of a Salt Marsh and Coastal Bank at the property of Faith Nyser. She said she investigated and all the shrubs and vegetation had been cut to the ground to provide, is her guess, a better view of the Marsh. She said that the reason a Citation was issued immediately is because unless something is done within fifteen days of an action taking place, the Commission has no leverage. She said individuals with fines for violations have thirty days to pay same. She said she recommended to all those present with violation fines to wait until after they met with the whole Commission to see what could be done.
Deputy showed photos of the violation at 50 Bayview. She said it was primarily shrubs which were cut down such as Beach Plum and Bayberry and maybe some small Oaks. She said that the fine for a first offense can be from $100 - $300 and since this was numerous plants she issued a fine of $300. She said it is the responsibility of the homeowner to known the Federal, State, and local laws of the Town they live in.
Ms. Nyser was present and said she had no idea that she couldn’t have someone cut things on her property. She said a friend of hers who is not a landscaper did the work. She said they bought the property for the view and now the view is gone since the vegetation has filled in. Deputy Usowski told Ms. Nyser that if she had filed with the Conservation Commission for view trimming that might have been allowed, but the fact is that any work within 100' of a wetland needs to be approved by the Conservation Commission. She agreed that the vegetation will grow back, but the habitat value is lost for the time being.
Mr. Collins asked Chairman Murley what he thought the best course of action would be in this instance. Chairman Murley said he thinks that Ms. Nyser should come back in a year’s time and the Commission can see what has grown back and what needs to be re-planted. Mr. Collins said he is concerned about setting precedent for any homeowner who owns property who sees that for a $300 fine they can go and just clear cut their property. He said it’s wrong and the Conservation Commission needs to do something to keep this from happening through the town. He said he just doesn’t know how to do it.
Mr. Hoerle said he thinks it is incumbent upon the Conservation Commission to set the kind of example for the Town and for the Cape that tells people that we have an obligation, that we have a stewardship, and an absolute responsibility to preserve this land and keep it as clean as we possibly can. He said he feels that the requirement of this Commission is to set an example by levying the appropriate fine.
Mr. Smith said that ignorance of the law is no excuse and agreed with Mr. Collins. He said we could lose whole chunks of property to erosion if this type of activity goes unchecked.
Chairman Murley suggested a site visit in September 2010 to see what’s grown back. He told Ms. Nyser that if she wants to maintain a view corridor the Conservation Commission can work with her on that.
A Motion was made and seconded to uphold the fine of $300 for this violation.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
9:30 P.M. Conservation Violation, Eastham Elks Lodge, 60 McKoy Road,
Map 08, Parcel 304.
Joe Eagle, the manager of the Elks Lodge, was present along with some other fellows from the Elks Lodge. Deputy Usowski told the Commission that she was called by a homeowner regarding some vegetative removal and land alteration to put in a storage trailer at the site.
Deputy Usowski said that at the site she found that some earth had been removed and some had probably been brought in. She said there is a large (probably 40'x10') trailer there which is supposedly temporary; but, she said she doesn’t know how long temporary is. She said that some shrubby vegetation as well as a large tree were removed and she has photos of it. She said this is within 100' of the wetland across the street and the closest violation is the vegetative removal which occurred at 40' from the wetland. At that time, because there was more extensive vegetative alteration with shrubs and trees being removed as well as some earth being moved around, a $300 fine was issued. She said she explained to Mr. Eagle that he was free to come to this meeting to discuss
the fine with the Commission and what could be done to fix the situation. She said that she put a “Stop Work” Order on the job so that when the Commissioners visited the site, what they say is what she saw.
Deputy Usowski showed photos of the site. One of the gentlemen from the Elks spoke to the photos and said it never crossed their mind about the wetland jurisdiction. He said the situation is unfortunate and embarrassing. He said they intended to replant the
area and the trailer was to be painted to “blend it” with the surroundings a little bit. He said the Elks do a lot of good things and the fine is going to hurt them for their charitable purposes.
Joe Eagle said the reason for the trailer is for the furniture for their yard sale for their charities. He said the fine was a very big surprise and if they had know they wouldn’t have done this. Deputy Usowski said that when she spoke with him after issuing the citation he told her it was only “temporary”, but didn’t ever say how long “temporary” was. He said they intended to paint it and plant around it and never did say how long it was intended to be there. He said there is no other place on the property where they can put it because they cannot put it on top of the leach field.
Commissioner Hoerle said that Deputy Usowski is trying to get some solution to this situation and would like them to come up with some way to do this. He said the way to do this is to correct the situation, not to disguise it. Deputy Usowski said her idea is to find another place to put the trailer and bring the area back to what it was. She said that if they want to keep the trailer where it is it will require a formal application to the Conservation Commission for approval.
Someone suggested from the audience that maybe a notice could go out with the tax bills reminding people about wetland regulations.
Commissioner Collins compared this violation to the previous one on the bay and said he thinks they are two different types of violations. Ms. Giovinazzo said “rules are rules” and they need to be the same for all. She said she does agree about putting landowners on notice about whether their property has wetland resources on or near their property. Mr. Hoerle suggested some way for the Elks to spread the word and a woman spoke from the floor saying that this information could be included in the Elks’ newsletter and it could inform a lot of people in the Orleans/Eastham area.
Commissioner Smith asked Mr. Eagle if they had any access to the industrial area off Holmes Road where they could store the trailer. Mr. Eagle responded that it’s better to have the trailer on site, otherwise the furniture and appliances etc. need to be moved another couple of times.
Discussion followed about where the trailer might be moved to. Deputy Usowski said she would be happy to sit down with them and try to come up with a location to put the trailer which would be out of the jurisdiction of the Conservation Commission. They said they will move the trailer and put the plantings back in the area.
Mr. Hoerle said he personally is willing to lower the fine for mitigation such as information being put in the Elks’ newsletter and other possibilities. Chairman Murley suggested that the applicants work with Deputy Usowski to get the trailer out of the 100' Buffer because to file for approval for the present location would be more than the fine
which has been levied against them. He said he is willing to lower the amount of the fine to $100. Mr. Eagle said he will find another place for it.
Mr. Hoerle MOVED and Mr. Collins SECONDED the Motion that the fine be reduced to $100, that the trailer be re-located outside the 100' Buffer Zone and that a site visit be made in a year to check the vegetation.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
10:10 P.M. Discussion about Corliss Road right-of-way to Town Cove.
There were a couple of people present from Corliss Way. Mr. Renner Wunderlich of 285 Corliss Way brought the matter to the attention of the Natural Resource Department.
Deputy Usowski said there is a right-of-way to Town Cove to the North of Mr. Wunderlich’s property. She said the matter of discussion is whether or not the dinghies which are at the end of the right-of-way are the cause of the erosion to the bank.
Mr. Wunderlich said he thinks this is something the neighborhood should discuss amongst themselves. He said he does think there are options for a solution to the problem but the neighbors have never gotten together to discuss this reasonably. He said he is committed to working out a solution.
There was some discussion about different approaches to the problem but it was agreed that the Conservation Commission could not say definitively that the dinghies are causing the erosion in this area.
10:23 P.M. Conservation Violation, Silsby, 5 Bayview Drive, Map 15, Parcel 052.
Deputy Usowski told the Commission she had issued a $100 fine to Jean Silsby for removal of a tree within 30' of the Coastal Dune at the above property. She read a letter from Ms. Silsby explaining why she removed the Pine (it was dead) and asking the Commission to reconsider their fine. She said in her letter that there is another dead tree in the back yard which also needs to be removed.
Commissioner Smith said this is a classic case of making a phone call and that the $100 find should stand.
It was MOVED by Mr. Collins and SECONDED by Ms. Giovinazzo that the fine should remain at $100.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
10:25 P.M. Arruda/Beaudoin Notice of Intent, DEP SE 19-1320.
Deputy Usowski reviewed this file for the Commissioners. These applicants proposed to re-construct and extend a revetment at the end of Longstreet Lane. They proposed putting an addition on to the revetment which would go on to Town property on Crest Avenue, which isn’t really a street any more. The Conservation Commission approved them only putting the revetment on their property and if any work was to be done on Town property they would have to get Board of Selectmen approval. She said they were approved for the revetment work on their property and a sand-drift fence which would be on Town property. She said they need to get Board of Selectmen approval to put the sand-drift fence on Town property.
10:28 P.M. Administrative Review filed by Rick Martin, 120 Dyer Prence Road, Map 19, Parcel 104A.
Deputy Usowski explained this proposal to prune and one removal. She said he wants to trim the lower limbs of five Cedars along the road which hang over the garden beds and to the left of the driveway he wants to trim Cedars to make room for Maples. She said he also wants to take down one small Spruce in the front yard. She said this is 50'+ from the resource but they have already been “lollipopped” and he didn’t say how much more farther up he wants to go. She said the Maples are small but pruning means different things to different people. She showed the Commissioners photos of the site.
Discussion followed about the trimming and how much a tree could be pruned before killing it. Chairman Murley said that with the amount of trees and not knowing exactly how much trimming/pruning is intended he feels that this proposal will require the filing of at least a Request for Determination of Applicability.
There was no further business and Mr. Smith MOVED to adjourn at approximately 10:40 P.M. Mr. Hoerle SECONDED the Motion.
SO VOTED UNANIMOUSLY.
Respectfully submitted.
Kay Stewart-Greeley,
Clerk
cc: Town Administrator
Town Clerk
Board of Selectmen
Building & Health
Planning Board
Library
| 
