Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-8-19XIinutes for August 19, 2015, adopted Sept. 2 CONSERVATION COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING 2 Bathing Beach Road Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554 ,�vww.nantucket- ma.gov Wednesday, August 19, 2015 4:00 P.M. 4 Fairgrounds Road, Training Room Commissioners: Ernie Steinauer (Chair), Andrew Bennett (Vice Chair), Ashley Erisman, David LaFleur, Ben Champoux, Ian Golding, Joe Topham Called to order at 4:03 p.m. Staff in attendance: Jeff Carlson, Natural Resources Coordinator: Terry Norton, Minutes'Taker. Attending Members: Steinauer, Bennett, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux, Golding, Topham - Absent Members: None Late Arrivals: None Earlier Departure: None Agenda adopted by unanimous consent *Matter has not been heard I. PUBLIC MEETING A. Public Comment: Bob Williams, Nantucket Pond Coalition — Update: they have been harvesting all week. Board members are invited to a demonstration at 5:30 on August 20 of the aquatic harvester at Bartlett Landing off Hummock Pond Road. ConCom might be getting additional notification about harvesting. II. PUBLIC HEARING A. Notice of Intent 1. APG/ DRS Realty Trust — 80 & 84 Wauwinet Road (11 -89.2, 28) SE48 -2749 (Cont 09/02/15) 2. Four Saratoga LLC — 14 Tennessee Avenue (60.1.2 -6) SE48 -2773 (Cont 09/02/15) 3. O'Connor — 40 Pocomo Road (14 -37) NAN -120 Sitting Steinauer, Bennett, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux, Golding, Topham Recused None Documentation Supporting documents and plans. Representative David M. Haines, Haines Hydrogeologic Consulting — Since the last hearing, he made modification by increasing the vegetated buffer to 50 feet from the vernal pool, the septic leach trenches shifted and a new well is proposed outside the buffer zone; stones are being placed at the drip edge of the house and directed to a swale around to the south so as not to lose water going to the wetland. Drainage area for the wetlands is Pocomo Road. Looked into making the house smaller, but it's being cut lengthwise; the porch has been narrowed by 3 feet; can't eliminate due to architectural reasons. Still asking for a waiver from the 75 -foot setback to the vernal pool; the house will be at 67 feet. They are maintaining the 50 -foot setback from the bordering vegetated wetland. He has provided photos of the areas in the south and western side that were previously cut to show how they are growing back. Looked at the former garden area, which is growing back with native growth; they will monitor it for future invasive species and handle appropriately. Explained that there is adequate separation between the house and the septic and leach fields. Michael O'Connor, Trustee — As much as he's been back into the property, it has always been dry; he's learned a lot about it filling with water this year. Stated the he's been pulling old construction debris out of the resource areas. Public Rose Webb, 23 Dukes Road — When she hears that an eco system is being replaced, she's concerned because it takes so long for it to grow. She's troubled for the pond. She's watching the eco system of the island disappear for bigger and bigger houses. The pond boarder should be a big concern. Discussion (4:07) Steinauer — The vernal pool question sticks in his mind. Golding — The question is whether or not the house will affect the vernal pool. Haines —They concede that by definition it is a vernal pool and must be treated as such; it hasn't retained water for 2 months. He didn't find fairy shrimp in there. They are not using fertilizers or herbicides and will be maintaining hydrology and water quality. About 1/4 of the house is within 75 feet of the vernal pool. Erisman — Noted that if there are turtles, they would need a buffer. Steinauer — There are no more protected turtles. Golding — He feels the applicant has demonstrated that he is taking the vernal pool into account. Haines —The vernal pool is seasonal and has dried down. Noted that the border of the vernal pool was based upon the observed high- water line of this very wet year. Champoux — This year was extremely wet so actually the house is probably 75 feet from the pool. Staff Have everything needed to close. Motion Motion to Close. (made by: LaFleur) (seconded by: Champoux) Vote Carried unanimously Page 1of8 Minutes for August 19. 2015. adorned Sent. 2 4. *Schwenk — 17 Dukes Road (41 -313) SE48- 2811 Sitting Steinauer, Bennett, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux, Golding, Topham Recused None Documentation Supporting documents and plans. Representative Don Bracken, Bracken Engineering, Inc. — The proposal is to abandon the existing septic and install a sewer pump to tie into Town sewer with 372 feet of line. Explained the method of abandonment of the septic. Public Cynthia Lenhart, 25 Dukes Road — Confirmed that this notice is just about abandoning the septic and hooking up to Town sewer. Rose Webb, 23 Dukes Road — She's for this if everything is tight and protected. Discussion (4:27) Steinauer — It's going into the road which minimizes the disturbance. Staff Have everything needed to close. Motion Motion to Close. (made by: LaFleur) (seconded by: Champoux) Vote Carried unanimously 5. *Caravan — 31 Woodbury Lane (41- 276.3) SE48 -2812 Sitting Steinauer, Bennett, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux, Golding, Topham Recused None Documentation Supporting documents and plans. Representative Paul Santos, Nantucket Surveyors — This is for the construction of a pool, associated hndscape and landscape, and air conditioning (A /C) on an already developed site. Reviewed the resource areas; all work is outside the 25 & 50 foot buffers. There was a letter from Laurentide Environmental, LLC about the age of the wetland line. When the lot was developed, there was an on -going condition that the silt fence line continues as the no- disturb buffer. Not asking for waivers. Public Bruce Perry, Laurentide Environmental, LLC — Asked for a permanent mark for the line. Toward the wetland boundary, some viable trees were cut. It looks like the roof run -off downspout is sticking out. (That might come from the neighbor.) Cormac Collier, Executive Director Nantucket Land Council — Reviewed the history of the rear no- disturb line set by the Planning Board at the time of approval of the sub division, which is above and beyond the ConCom standards. Discussion (4:35) Golding — Asked why they are asking for removal of the on -going condition and the affect on the abutter. Santos — His client asked to go with the standard 25 -foot buffer. It's specific to this piece of property. Bennett — Noted that removing the condition would be overturning a prior board's decision. Santos — Asked that they proceed with the application as submitted and withdraw the request for removal of the on -going condition. Staff Have everything needed to close. Motion Motion to Close. (made by: Bennett) (seconded by: LaFleur) Vote Carried unanimously 6. * Goose Cove, LLC — 6 Goose Cove Way (59.4 -366) SE48 -2816 Sitting Steinauer, Bennett, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux, Golding Recused Topham Documentation Supporting documents and plans. Representative Don Bracken, Bracken Engineering, Inc. — Reviewed the permitting history of Goose Cove Way. The wetland resource areas are adjacent to Goose Cove and there is a coastal bank; it's buffers are shown. Reviewed the proposed work, which includes filling in the tennis courts. No proposed structures within the 50 -foot buffer but there is proposed grading. They are putting in the 15 -foot buffer required an existing Order of Conditions (OofC); the landscaper was out there recently. Noted that the Planning Board and applicant think this is compliance with the OofC, but the staff hasn't gone out to look at it; he's asking that the staff do that. The slope is just over 10 %. Asked for a continuance. Public Deneen Burke, 6 Arkansas Avenue — There were 3 conditions on the OofC applied to this property in regards to the tennis courts; reviewed the conditions. Those were to carry over to the subdivision. It is her understanding that one lot was released with the agreement of a retainer for the 15 -foot buffer and access to the pond. If ConCom approves this NOI, she wants that 15 -foot buffer maintained, which would mitigate noise; also the driveway was supposed to be in place before any development started. The 15 -foot buffer comes up to the wetlands. Agrees with Mr. Collier about staff and the committee looking at the site. Disagrees it is a hardship to the buyer to hold this up for another month. Carol Bowditch, 11 South Cambridge Street — It was her understanding that none of the lots would be released until all conditions were met. (That is not correct.) Jay Bowditch, 11 South Cambridge Street — Asked who the applicant is. (A protected contract buyer.) Cormac Collier, Executive Director Nantucket Land Council — There was significant discussion in regards to Goose Cove Way and the tarmac coming down to South Cambridge Street. Suggested holding this so that staff can go out and look at it; there is work that needs to be done. Asked if the regrading is related to the proposed pool (yes). The ConCom OofC is an opportunity to ensure compliance; suggested they Page 2of8 Minutes for August 19 2015 adopted Sept. 2 require the landscaper supply all records of fertilizer use, especially in the Madaket water district; noted that the water quality of Goose Cove is pretty poor. There are three OofCs on the property: tennis court, subdivision, and Wannacomet Water expansion. Suggested that staff should ensure they are in compliance with all OofCs. Bruce Perry, Laurentide Environmental, LLC — He could find no order to construct the footpaths; they should come back for a permit to construct those footpaths. The top of the coastal bank should be shown as the first break in the flow above the flood elevation; in this location; in this case it looks too flat or if it's land subject to coastal storm flowage and the slope should be measured. Discussion (4:48) Steinauer — The pool draining would be conditioned as per usual. Explained Ms Burke's issues are all outside of ConCom purview; this board doesn't have the jurisdiction to enforce the Planning Board. Golding — Agrees with the idea of a site visit. Staff The pool, the patio, and a corner of the garage studio are within ConCom jurisdiction. He will inspect the site with the OofCs and, if they wish, schedule a site visit for the board. Motion Continued to 9/2 without objection Vote N/A 7. *Goose Cove, LLC — 4 Goose Cove Way (59.4 -30) SE48 -2817 Sitting Steinauer, Bennett, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux, Golding Recused Topham Documentation Supporting documents and plans. Representative Don Bracken, Bracken Engineering, Inc. — In light of the concerns related to 6 Goose Cove Way, he feels there is no sense in going forward with this at this time. Asked for a continuance. Public Deneen Burke, 6 Arkansas Avenue Carol & Jay Bowditch,11 South Cambridge Street Cormac Collier, Executive Director Nantucket Land Council Discussion None Staff None Motion Continued to 9/2 without objection Vote N/A 8. *Peacock — 46 West Miacomet Avenue (86 -6) SE48- 2814 Sitting Steinauer, Bennett, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux, Golding, Topham Recused None Documentation Supporting documents and plans. Representative Brian Madden, LEC Environmental — The boundaries for the coastal dune, coastal beach, and land subject to coastal storm flowage were set during a Request for Determination of Applicability. Work is largely within existing disturbed area; reviewed the proposed work. No waivers are requested. Any temporarily disturbed areas during construction will be restored with native plants and beach grass. Requested a continuance. Arthur Reade, Reade, Gullicksen, Hanley, & Gifford LLP Public None Discussion (5:16) None Staff Still waiting for Massachusetts Natural Heritage ruling. Motion Continued to 9/2 without objection Vote N/A 9. *Moore — 8 Cornish Street (42.4.1 -116) SE48- 2813 Sitting Steinauer, Bennett, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux, Golding, Topham Recused None Documentation Supporting documents and plans. Representative Dick Earle, Earle & Sullivan, for Justin Moore — This is located in the flood zone and needs to be raised. HDC has permitted work for the demolition of the shed, the house with new foundation, the top of which will meet flood zone requirement. They are processing a dewatering permit as well as a precaution. Public None Discussion (5:21) None Staff Temporary dewatering would require approval if it turns out it is needed. Have everything needed to close. Motion Motion to Close. (made by: LaFleur) (seconded by: Champoux) Vote Carried unanimously Page 3 of 8 TNlinutes for August 19 2015 adopted Sept. 2 10. *Collis — 5 Galen Avenue (29 -122) SE48- 2815 Sitting Steinauer, Bennett, Erisman, LaFleur, Golding, Topham Recused Champoux (stepped out) Documentation Supporting documents and plans. Representative Arthur D. Gasbarro, Blackwell and Associates Inc. — For work on an existing single - family dwelling on Brant Point located within land subject to coastal storm flowage and the buffer to a bordering vegetated wetlands. Explained the work to be done to include moving away from the wetland resource area. There is an area proposed to be left undisturbed. Asking to maintain existing lawn on the north side of the lot. There are no grade changes. Public Cormac Collier, Executive Director Nantucket Land Council — Asked for confirmation that it is a small propane tank, which will be relocated and will be placed above ground. Bruce Perry, Third -party Consultant Conservation Commission — Looking at the inspection report, it will be tight quarters and the big machinery (couldn't hear what he said) Discussion (5:25) Erisman — Asked the size of changes in within the 25 -foot buffer (about 10 square feet) Staff Have everything needed to close. Motion Motion to Close. (made by: LaFleur) (seconded by: Bennett) Vote Carried 6 -0 B. Amended Orders of Conditions 1. Kelley — 78 Union St — Roadway Mariner Way (55.1.4 -72) SE48 -2740 Sitting Steinauer, Bennett, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux, Golding, Topham Recused None Documentation Supporting documents and plans. Representative Bill Hunter, Vaughan, Dale, Hunter and Beaudette, P.C. — Reviewed the sequence of events leading up to this request for a change in the surface material for the roadway to be impervious. They looked at the Flexipave Mr. Golding sent to his office; R J. O'Connell, the civil engineer working for the client, responded with a number of reasons why it's not a good idea, main of which it won't hold up to heavy vehicle usage. When boats are pulled out through a curved roadway, there is more tension and traction than on a straight roadway. Noted that they are proposing a bio- retention area along the road. Public Cormac Collier, Executive Director Nantucket Land Council — He questions the assertion that the impervious surface is the only option; this board and Planning Board should come to some consensus of agreement on road surfacing material. This board approved porous pavement many times; Hatch's is an example. Discussion (5:34) Steinauer — The question becomes if the drainage and retention basins are adequate for an impervious road. Golding — Mr. Hunter is probably correct about the traction, but he believes that would depend on speed. Noted that Hatch's surface seems to stand up to an awful lot of wear. Asked if Mr. Hunter's client would entertain that surface. Hunter — Doesn't think the Planning Board would entertain that; they were very clear about the concrete surface, which is the same as on Union and Washington Streets. Pointed out that there are far more roads surfaced with bituminous concrete and adjacent to the harbor and wetlands than there are porous parking lots. Given the OEM plan, two commissions will be monitoring the use and cleanliness of the retention area with weekly inspections; they are confident that the road will protect the interests of this board as well as the concerns of the Planning Board. Erisman — She wonders about how many emergencies this road would handle as opposed to the amount of runoff. She believes the non - porous material would have more damage to the water quality in the long run than damage to the road surface. In her opinion, porous surface is important here. Hunter — As detailed in Mr. O'Connor s letter, there are other Planning Board concerns that go beyond this being the emergency evacuation point for the harbor. Steinauer — If concrete is approved, there needs to be a periodic testing requirement in place to see if it really does hold up given how sandy it will be there. Golding — Asked if monitoring the retention basins would satisfy requirements. There is no boat ramp there so the only boats that can be launched or retrieved at that location are those that have trailers that won't sink into the sand. A sand surface would have the same capacity as the beach. Feels porous pavement used at Hatch's is more than adequate to handle that kind of boat trailer traffic. Bennett — Truck traffic at Hatch's is heavy. Hunter — Asked what sort of information this board has received on the surface at hatch's. Steinauer — Nothing other than it's still here. Bennett — Suggested that maybe the Swale could be longer and closer to the road. Hunter — Suggested the board approve the amendment and have staff approve the plan for the bio- retention area and the swale. R.J. O'Connor can sit down with staff and go over the plans for the swale. Staff The direction of the flow on those roads is partially directed toward the retention area, part back to the sewer on Union Street, and part onto Washington Street Extension. There is an extensive storm water drainage system into which this would flow. It is also interesting note the ground water level in relation to use of a porous surface Page 4 of 8 Minutes for August 19 2015 adopted Sept. 2 Motion Motion to Close. (made by: Bennett) (seconded by: Champoux) Vote Carried unanimously Discussion Staff — Can discuss additional conditions to put on this. Steinauer — This board is talking about approving a concrete roadway with a bio- retention area. Motion Motion to Issue with additional conditions. (made by: LaFleur) (seconded by: Champoux) Vote Carried 6- 1 / /Erisman opposed III. PUBLIC MEETING B. Request for Determination of Applicability 1. *Connolly — 199 Madaket Road (59 -58.1) Sitting Steinauer, Bennett, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux, Golding, Topham Recused None Documentation Supporting documents and plans. Representative Arthur D. Gasbarro, Blackwell and Associates Inc. — This is for confirmation of the resource boundaries; All work is within the 100 -foot buffer but outside the 25 -foot buffer and most outside the 50 -foot buffer. Reviewed the resource areas. He received the technical consultant report which raised concern about landscape debris deposited in the back placed within the 25 -foot buffer zone. There are no waivers. Public Bruce Perry, Third -party Consultant Conservation Commission — Agrees with Mr. Gasbarro but it's mostly a pre - disturbed area. The board needs to think about the plantings going in. The 25 -foot buffer to the wetland is very thick growth. Discussion (6:02) Steinauer — Asked staff if there would be any conditions to be placed upon this; sees no issues. Staff This is appropriate as RDA with a Positive 2A confirming resource boundaries and Negative 3 conditioning all landscape debris be disposed outside area of jurisdiction. Motion Motion to Issue as recommended. (made by: Champoux) (seconded by: Bennett) Vote Carried unanimously C. Minor Modifications 1. Nantucket Land Bank — 80 Miacomet Avenue (66 -126) SE48 -2394 (Cont 09/02/15) 2. Squam Partners LLC — 89 Squam Road (13 -3) SE48 -2530 Sitting Steinauer, Bennett, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux, Golding, Topham Recused None Documentation Supporting documents and plans. Representative Arthur D. Gasbarro, Blackwell and Associates Inc. — Requesting only a change to the footprint. Public None Discussion (6:07) None Staff Recommend this can be approved as a minor modification. :Motion Motion to Approve as a minor modification. (made by: Bennett) (seconded by: Champoux) Vote Carried unanimously 3. Sabet — 77 Eel Point Road (32 -14 & 44) SE48 -2726 Sitting Steinauer, Bennett, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux, Golding, Topham Recused None Documentation Supporting documents and plans. Representative Don Bracken, Bracken Engineering, Inc. — Requesting change to the pool configuration all outside the 50 -foot buffer; the cabana was reduced in size. Public None Discussion (6:09) None Staff Recommend this can be approved as a minor modification. Motion Motion to Approve as a minor modification. (made by: Champoux) (seconded by: Bennett) Vote Carried unanimously D. Certificates of Compliance 1. Trudel — 57 Wauwinet Road (14 -22) SE48 -1699 Sitting Steinauer, Bennett, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux, Golding, Topham Staff For construction of a building and pool. It is in compliance. Recommend this be issued with no on -going conditions. Discussion (6:11) None Motion Motion to Issue. (made by: Champoux) (seconded by: Bennett) Vote Carried unanimously 2. Dolphin Court RT — 6 Dolphin Court (42.4.1 -113) SE48 -2567 Reissue Sitting Steinauer, Bennett, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux, Golding, Joe Topham Staff Explained why it is being reissued; previously it was for a registered portion of the land; this is for the unregistered portion of the land. It's compliant. Recommend this be reissued. Discussion (6:13) None Motion Motion to Reissue. (made by: Golding) (seconded by: LaFleur) Vote Carried unanimously Page 5 of 8 Minutes for August 19 2015 adopted Sept. 2 3. Allison — 7 Pond Road (56 -153) SE48 -2155 Sitting Steinauer, Bennett, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux, Golding, Topham Staff This is to invalidate the OofC to close it out. Discussion (6:14) None Motion Motion to Issue Certificate of Invalidation. (made by: Champoux) (seconded by: Erisman) Vote Carried unanimously E. Orders of Condition 1. 48 SPR LLC — 48 Shimmo Pond Road (43 -79) SE48 -2789 Sitting Steinauer, Bennett, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux, Golding, Topham Staff For the bio- engineer structure with fiber logs and impregnated plants. Reviewed necessary corrections: strike Finding Nr.s 3, 4, & 5. Finding 15 notes this is not a coastal engineering structure. Also included the waiver request. He will add that the proposed will use 4X4 posts. Can ask the applicant to come in on a yearly basis for an update through the submittal of a monitoring report at a regular meeting starting one year after construction. He will add Condition 33 about maintenance of the vegetation and logs. He will add Condition 34 that if less that 75% of plantings survive the applicant shall come before the commission for remedial action. Discussion (6:15) Golding — They said the posts would be 4X4 not 6X6. Bennett — Wonders about a time- frame. Steinauer — Asked if there is anything about repair and maintenance of the vegetation. Motion Motion to Approve as amended. (made by: Golding) (seconded by: LaFleur) Vote Carried unanimously 2. White - 47A West Chester Street (41- 227.1) SE48 -2790 Sitting Steinauer, Bennett, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux, Golding, Topham Staff Due to lack of consensus, he drafted both a positive and negative OofCs. Reviewed the positive OofC: Condition 19 references a timeline that ensures completion of restoration areas before construction starts, he will add a condition addressing wetland markers. Reviewed the negative OofC. The finding is that the requested waivers weren't satisfactory enough and the board felt there are reasonable alternatives. Stated that this Oof C notes that if this were to come back with no waivers required, it could be reconsidered. In response to Mr. Bennett's question, ConCom regulations are dated to 1978; methodology might have been different and there might have been a pre - existing structure. He'd have to research that. Discussion (6:26) Erisman — Asked about permanent marks along the edge of the wetland. The majority is not in support of a positive order. Golding — In regards to Condition 7 in the denial, he feels the envelop has been pushed to such an extent and makes him uneasy. Bennett — The house was built in 1990 and well inside the 50 -foot buffer; asks if there was a previous structure. Motion Motion to Issue the denial. (made by: Bennett) (seconded by: Topham) Vote Carried 5- 2 / /LaFleur & Steinauer opposed 3. Nantucket Islands Land Bank — 22 Cathcart Road (43 -68) SE48 -2810 Sitting Steinauer, Bennett, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux, Golding, Topham Staff Removal of vegetation in creation of a public parking area. Included a monitoring report and the condition that invasive species come up they can be removed. Discussion (6:41) None Motion Motion to Approve. (made by: Bennett) (seconded by: Champoux) Vote Carried unanimously 4. O'Connor — 40 Pocomo Road (14 -37) NAN -120 Sitting Steinauer, Bennett, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux, Golding, Topham Staff He has a monitoring report to include the disturbed area on the south side of the property and garden area. There are provisions for other disturbed areas to be revegetated. Condition 21 call for removal of invasive species. He will add Condition 22 requiring a monitoring report to include the configuration and composition of soils around the house. The waiver is for the 75 -feet to the vernal pool but the 50 -foot buffer for the vegetation is not being waived. Discussion (6:42) Erisman — Asked for a report on soils around the house. tilotion Motion to Issue as amended. (made by: Bennett) (seconded by: LaFleur) Vote Carried unanimously 5. Schwenk - 17 Dukes Road (41 -313) SE48 -2811 Sitting Steinauer, Bennett, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux, Golding, Topham Staff Based on the discussion today, he will add Condition 20 requiring a yearly pressure test. Condition 19 allows sleeves only within the 25 -foot buffer; in most cases it's through the 50 -foot buffer. Discussion (6:45) Discussion about whether or not to allow sleeving beyond 25 -foot. Motion Motion to Issue as amended. (made by: Champoux) (seconded by: Bennett) Vote Carried unanimously Page 6of8 Minutes for August 19, 2015 6. Caravan — 31 Woodbury Lane (41- 276.3) SE48 -2812 Sitting Steinauer, Bennett, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux, Golding, Topham Staff This has the standard condition about the pool drainage. Condition 20 addresses markers approved by staff to be installed to prevent unintentional expansion of the lawn. Given the circumstances and no- disturb line being greater than normally required, they held the more conservative line. Discussion (6:47) None Motion Motion to Issue. (made by: Champoux) (seconded by: LaFleur) Vote Carried unanimously 7. Moore — 8 Cornish Street (42.4.1 -116) SE48- 2813 Sitting Steinauer, Bennett, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux, Golding, Topham Staff This is the demolition and reconstruction of a structure in compliance with the flood zone requirements. He will add Condition 19 stating no fill is to be added. Discussion (6:50) Bennett — Asked if the dewatering is necessary to they have to come back. (Yes) Champoux — Wants to emphasize that there is to be no grade change. Motion Motion to Issue as amended. (made by: Champoux) (seconded by: Bennett) Vote Carried unanimously 8. Collis — 5 Galen Avenue (29 -122) SE48- 2815 Sitting Steinauer, Bennett, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux, Golding, Topham Staff This requires waivers. Has monitoring for the revegetation area. Condition 21 addresses removal of invasive species; but that's on someone else's property; he can change it to read that if any invasive species are noted it is to be brought to the attention to the board. He will add a condition for no fill. Explained the waivers are for no adverse impact /no reasonable alternative and for net benefit. Discussion (6:52) Champoux — Needs to have the grade pointed out. Motion Motion to Issue as amended. (made by: Champoux) (seconded by: LaFluer) Vote Carried unanimously F. Extension of Orders of Conditions 1. CMIDM, LLC — 93 & 99 Eel Point Road (32 - 9 & 10) SE48 -2178 2. CIIDM, LLC — 93 & 99 Eel Point Road (32 — 9 & 10) NAN -084 3. CMDM, LLC — 93 & 99 Eel Point Road (32 — 9 & 10 ) SE48 -2479 Sitting Steinauer, Bennett, Erisman, LaFleur, Champoux, Golding, Topham Staff Reviewed the OofCs. These are all expiring at the same time because of the permit extension act. Recommends issuance of the 1 -year extension on all three. Discussion (6:55) None Motion Motion to Issue the 1 -yer extensions on all three. (made by: Bennett) (seconded by: Champoux) Vote Carried unanimously G. Other Business 1. Approval of Minutes: August 5, 2015; Motion to Approve. (made by: LaFluer) (seconded by: Champoux) Carried unanimously 2. Reports: a. CPC, Golding — First meeting August 18 reviewed 3 projects and reviewed status of the grass playing fields. b. NP &EDC, Bennett — Nothing c. Mosquito Control Committee, Erisman — Nothing 3. Commissioners Comment: a. Erisman — Agrees about putting enforcement of the fertilizer regulations on people coming before this board. Staff — Monitoring reports at the beginning and end of the growing season should work; the new database system reminds the office which projects are due to submit monitoring reports and when. They can enter in any fertilizer requirements as well. A condition can be included requiring the name and license of the fertilizer applicator. Golding — He's concerned about the practical application and people thinking it's just another level of bureaucracy and blowing it off. Champoux — Thinks this will encourage landscapers to get educated and licensed on fertilizer. b. Steinauer — 7 I Street violation. Staff — He hasn't yet gone to look at it; they were issued a valid permit for a path and elevated walkway; the applicant wasn't able to gain an HDC permit for the whole project. There's a portion where it is in compliance. c. Champoux — 11 Crows Nest Way apparently dug through the dunes creating a wide swath. d. Steinauer — Madaket Smith's Point at the end of California Ave, which is a rental property, the current tenants are driving and parking on the dunes and salt marsh; that's Audubon property. 4. Administrator /Staff Reports: a. Update on Thompson, 14 Fargo Way — The coastal engineering structure had an extra fence; those stringers and 2X4s are gone. There might still be more posts in place for the fence than there should be. The nourishment material is not in compliance. Stated he is ready to recommend removal of the coastal engineering structure and be done with it. b. Regulation discussion — The last update was 2013. The update could include bio- engineered structures. Asked if this board wants to discuss with the Planning Board agreed standards for road material. Also there has been Page 7 of 8 Minutes for August 19 2015 adopted Sept. 2 interest shown in discussing the possibility of minimal size for isolated vegetated wetland or different set of standards for a very small wetland. This board had one that was 5X5 feet. Also this board has requested a workshop on invasive species and a long -term land management for larger properties, i.e. Land Bank. Asked board members to list subjects and regulations they would like to discuss. c. Reminded the board to check their September schedule and 9/2 will be long with 'Sconset Beach Preservation Fund back on the agenda. Notion to Adjourn: 7:21 p.m. Submitted by: Terry L. Norton Page 8 of 8