Printer Friendly Layout

News/Events - Meeting Minutes

Meeting was called to order 6:19 at p.m.

Members Present: Mr. Snow, Chairman, Mr. Breitenstein, Mr. Jones, Mr. Greenbaum, Ms. Scott-Pipes.

Also Present: Paul Shea, Agent, Jim O’Connell, Agent, Carol Logue, Secretary,

Agenda: Motion to accept the agenda Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Jones. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Request for Determination: Irish, 22 Marshfield Ave. (install pavers in back & walkway)
Steve Irish and Ron Jenkins were present at the hearing. Planning to take up crushed stone and install pavers in sand in small fenced-in back yard and 4’ walkway in front. Pattern is random, each block has spacers. Inside fence putting pavers on top of crushed stone. Motion for a negative 3 determination - “The work described in the Request is within the Buffer Zone, as defined in the regulations, but will not alter an Area subject to protection under the Act. Therefore, said work does not require the filing of a Notice of Intent, subject to the following conditions (if any).” Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Jones. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Request for Determination: Seastrand, 97 Edward Foster Rd (deck)
Erin Cuneo, daughter of applicant was present at the hearing. Deck is 90% finished at this point. Mr. Shea: met with her mother, filed with building and received a permit. Proposed deck is minimally within the 100’ buffer zone. Motion for a negative 3 determination - “The work described in the Request is within the Buffer Zone, as defined in the regulations, but will not alter an Area subject to protection under the Act. Therefore, said work does not require the filing of a Notice of Intent, subject to the following conditions (if any).” Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Greenbaum. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Request for Determination: Apicella, 6 Peggotty Beach Rd (remove sand from driveway)
Paul Mirabito was present at the hearing. Filed RDA to remove sand as result of December 2010 storm. Filing a Notice of Intent for a 5-year maintenance order. Ms. Scott-Pipes: removed sand should go back on beach. There is a hard-packed gravel drive he wants to clear, no work on other side of lot, only the driveway. Going on town property to dispose of the sand; need to get Town’s approval. Not grading any part of the lot. Mr. O’Connell: Not a fan of removing the material, but need to allow access. Is the town usually OK with putting sand back on the beach? Mr. Snow: This isn’t the first time this has happened. We only allow them to place sand back on the beach, can’t remove. Believe Commission allowed gravel driveway a long time ago. Dan Pallotta, Trustee for Joseph G. Pallotta, 8 Peggotty Beach: day late filing an RDA; sand depth won’t allow a fire truck to get to the house. Have a Notice of Intent from 2006, intend to file a Notice of Intent for a 5-year maintenance order, but there are 5 families to deal with. Asking permission to clear area at the same time as Mr. Apicella. Do have an RDA filed to remove sand from parking area. Also have to remove sand from under the house. Since revetment was put in, it makes matters worse. Request an Emergency Certificate. Neighbor on other side has an open Notice of Intent. Combined, we could make a real dune. Mr. Snow: this sand was deposited in December? Water meter and gas meter was covered – dug out. If he puts it on the beach, it will be put in front of Pallota’s house at the property line. Always cleared the sand together and usually the 3rd house too. Talk to Al Bangert at DPW. Motion for a negative 3 determination - “The work described in the Request is within the Buffer Zone, as defined in the regulations, but will not alter an Area subject to protection under the Act. Therefore, said work does not require the filing of a Notice of Intent, subject to the following conditions (if any).” Mr. Greenbaum. Second Ms. Scott-Pipes. Motion passed by unanimous vote.
Mr. Pallotta asked for a little leniency. Allow him to file after-the-fact. This could have been done a few months ago. Mr. O’Connell: Technical standpoint allowing people to clear driveway, common sense, but also setting a precedent for people to come in and want it now. Suggest give him authorization, but notify the abutter to see if they have any issues. Bring a letter from neighbors and from town authorizing activity. Perhaps after that we can issue an emergency permit.

Request for Determination: Musto, 111 Glades Rd (elevate)
Shirley Musto and John Barges were present at the hearing. Elevating house. Mr. O’Connell went and reviewed plan to elevate 3’. No intention of touching house. Don’t get any water on the 1st floor. and only get water a half dozen times in the basement. Keeping cement foundation. Pour 3’ of cement on top. Adding timbers under deck to elevate 3’. Not replacing any sonotubes. If there is a need to replace sonotubes, need erosion controls and notify agent John. Barges: will put sonotubes in only if needed. Going through the elevation program. There will be no excavation, unless sonotubes are required. Motion for a negative 3 determination - “The work described in the Request is within the Buffer Zone, as defined in the regulations, but will not alter an Area subject to protection under the Act. Therefore, said work does not require the filing of a Notice of Intent, subject to the following conditions (if any).” A preconstruction shall be scheduled with the Conservation Agent if sonotubes need to be installed. Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Jones. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Request for Determination: Mass Electric/dba National Grid, Cole Parkway (relocate 2 utility poles)
Paul Shea: Saving town money, no need for National Grid to attend this hearing. Relocating 2 utility poles. Very simple project. Motion for negative 3 determination - “The work described in the Request is within the Buffer Zone, as defined in the regulations, but will not alter an Area subject to protection under the Act. Therefore, said work does not require the filing of a Notice of Intent, subject to the following conditions (if any).” Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Jones. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Wetlands Hearing: Farina, 10, 12 Ocean Dr, 24 Humarock Beach (install boulders) (cont.)
Applicant’s representative requested a continuance for four weeks. Motion to continue the hearing to August 15, 2011 at 6:30 p.m. Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Greenbaum. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Wetlands Hearing: Lilly, 147A Border St (new build & septic) (cont.)
Board of Health has approved. Mr. Shea thinks they are still dealing with the Zoning Board. Motion to continue the hearing to August 1, 2011 at 6:30 p.m. Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Greenbaum. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Wetlands Hearing: Seoane, 172 Gannett Rd (driveway for new build) (cont.)
Applicant’s representative requested a continuance for 2 weeks. Motion to continue the hearing to August 1, 2011 at 6:30 p.m. Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Greenbaum. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Wetlands Hearing: Blaney, 274 Central Ave. (septic & rip-rap protection) (cont.)
Applicant’s representative requested a continuance. Board of Health has approved. Motion to continue the hearing to August 1, 2011 at
6:40 p.m. Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Greenbaum. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Wetlands Hearing: O’Brien, 29 Surfside Rd (replacement of patio)
Greg Morse, Brad Holmes, and Joe O’Brien were present at the hearing. Abutters notification was submitted. After-the-fact patio replacement, apologize that it wasn’t part of the seawall project. In-kind patio approximately the same size and location. Raised wall 2’. Patio installed after seawall repairs were made. Project stopped by Commission. Came in with Notice of Intent. Didn’t know at the time there had been a patio. Don’t feel it impacted the top of the coastal bank. FEMA flood zone A, don’t feel it impacts floodways. Mapped barrier beach, but really isn’t a coastal bank. Completely stabilized lawn. You were asked to file this at the end of May. Mr. O’Connell: barrier beach and coastal dune, not a coastal bank. Because it is an AO flood zone, waves of 3’ or less move across the site. A solid structure accelerates the overwash, and it does have an impact, but likely minimal. If patio were larger and flood waters were cascading to other properties, it would be problematic. Patios in V flood zones should not be impermeable and should not be at property boundary. Boulders/revetments slow down the wave action. Mr. Greenbaum: lucky Google Earth is so old, because the patio showed. Mr. Snow: any hard surface behind the wall is going to accelerate the wave action and overwash. For all future projects we need to think about adjacent properties. Peter Williams, Vine/GZA – for flow coming across deck, could install curbs in the deck and any water coming across would be broken up. If they are 6” to 8”, flow would be diverted. Might consider that in our conditions. Adjacent to this property they removed and repaired the seawall and put boulders farther landward. Mr. Holmes: spoke to Joe O’Brien, he has no problem with boulders being there; 31 Surfside might have an issue. Motion to close the hearing Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Greenbaum. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Wetlands Hearing: Balog/Demers, 39 Bayberry Rd (raze/rebuild garage/addition/deck)
Carmen Hudson, Cavanaro Consulting, Dennis Balog, Robert Demers, and Attorney Richard Henderson were present at the hearing. Abutters notification was submitted. Total 14,600 sq. ft. salt marsh in rear and entire property in flood plain, base AE flood zone, elevation 11’ and land subject to coastal storm flowage. Home is on a tile foundation. Floor of garage is at elevation 9’. Lawn extends to the edge of the salt marsh, with a fence. Homeowners would like to raze existing one-car garage and replace with a 2-car garage at elevation 11’. Because the garage will be elevated, would like to connect garage and house with open deck and a 40 sq. ft. mud room addition. All improvements will be in the 50’ to 100’ buffer zone. Want to square off front of house with open deck. Part of new deck will be within 50’ buffer zone, supported on pilings.. No part of deck will be any closer than the existing structure. New deck is in the 50’ buffer on 6 sonotubes; will plant area with native species, approximately 1200 sq. feet along the salt marsh. Mr. Breitenstein: any additional driveway with new garage? Actual driveway will be shortened and replaced with a wooden ramp. Mr. Greenbaum: what is total square footage of additions? Garage 186 sq. ft. larger, new addition 37 sq. ft. difference in decking 485 sq. ft., total 707. Guideline for mitigation is 2 : 1. Mr. Jones: wooden ramp 20’x20’. Planking should allow water to go through; tongue and groove is not spaced. That can be changed to give spacing. Mr. O’Connell: OK with project itself, pleased with mitigation. Picket fence is on town land, should be moved to property line. Between fence and property will come back to salt marsh. South side mitigation, keep square footage same, move some to the area where the fence will be moved. Would like to see a list of the salt tolerant plants. Put mitigation on north side also. Submit a planting plan. Motion to close the hearing Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Greenbaum. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Wetlands Hearing: Sullivan, 159 Summer St (septic)
Greg Morse, Morse Engineering was present at the hearing. Abutters notification was submitted. Plan shows blue wetlands line, red shows 50’ buffer and green 100’ buffer, flagged by Brad Holmes. Nothing located within Natural Heritage jurisdiction. Proposed septic upgrade, tying in using existing septic tank. Pressure dosed leaching area. 80.4’ from wetlands. Access over the driveway and easement. 12” straw waddle to prevent any erosion from entering wetlands. There are a couple of trees coming down. Placed as far away as possible. Board of Health has approved. Motion to close the hearing Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Jones. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Wetlands Hearing: Wood, 126 Captain Peirce Rd (septic)
Terry McGovern, Stenbeck and Taylor was present at the hearing. Abutters notification was submitted. Proposing a replacement septic system. Paul Shea required an updated wetland line. Cesspool is about 22’ feet from wetland and 30’ from the stream. Replace cesspool with monolithic tank with a leaching bed system. The property has another septic system. No other place for the system. 100’ from stream channel. 100’ buffer zone cuts through the house. The closest point to BVW is 71’. Proposing erosion control barrier. The system will be 7-1/2’ above ground water elevation. Down 10’ without encountering water. Encumbered because of an easement in the front. Board of Health has approved. Motion to close the hearing Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Jones. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Show Cause Hearing: Brodigan/Walsh Corp., 104 Oceanside Dr (concrete)
Mr. Brodigan called earlier in the day stating there had been a death in family, requested a continuance; insisted on not having Walsh Corp. come to the meeting without him. Ms. Scott-Pipes had been to the site the day they were working; asked if they had any permits; told them not to pour the cement; asked who was in charge. Spoke to the contractors and to the wife. Walsh Corp. insisted they were pouring and she informed them if they did, they may be facing fines. She felt threatened and wanted some backup, went to the police station, ran into Steve Bjorklund at the Town Hall. When Penny was first there no concrete had been poured. Mr. Bjorklund went back with her and also told them they could face fines. They said they were pouring and didn’t seem to care if they paid fines. Police officer did come down. Commission’s consensus was to fine them. Mr. Greenbaum found property on Google maps; they did have a much smaller area of cement, but besides fining, they should remove the additional concrete. Would probably have to allow them to keep original size. Should have filed regardless. At minimum half the deck needs to be pulled out. Possibly two options, $300 a day or $300 per order they would be in violation of, if they’d filed. After returning the second time, probably a third of the cement had been poured. Contractors stated they had $1,000 worth of concrete and he was going to pour it and another $1,000 in another truck and that was going to be poured. They had wire mesh, so they did it correctly. Mr. Snow: They were forewarned. Send Enforcement Order and look into fines.

Show Cause Hearing: GZA/Vine/Sequoia, Cole Parkway, Harborwalk
Peter Williams and Ed McCloud, Sequoia Construction were present at the hearing. Discussed corrected work plan. South end of Cole Parkway where the new harborwalk was installed, blue shows limit of installed revetment. Order of Conditions allowed improvement of revetment toward beginning of retaining wall, not fully complete. Gap in wall because the telephone poles have not been moved. Designed for new armor stone, but no new stone required. Plan to remove stone in an area, leave natural 6” & 8” cobble for stabilization. Believe silt boom will remain in place. Proposing to do work when utility poles are relocated. Mr. O’Connell: was called to go on a preconstruction site visit and the only thing mentioned was the erosion controls. Commission has different plans, should have had a preconstruction before the revetment was touched. Plumes of sediment flowing into the resource. Day that Mr. O’Connell was there eventually put full silt curtain boom in, but don’t believe it was supposed to be put in the intertidal area. Sediment should have been put in the parking lot. Don’t know how far the revetment extended into the intertidal zone. Think we should allow them to start work on areas further landward. Mr. Williams: did a topo survey, rocks are where the preexisting revetment was at best estimate. Gravel and soil shouldn’t have been placed there. Paul Shea: whose idea was the coffer dam? Who allowed the fill to go into the intertidal zone? Mr. McCloud: Tried to put in parking lot; mostly boulders and wet soil; tried to make a dam. Digging in the tidal zone. The Orders state, any changes, need to come back to the Commission. No way the limit of work line went that far into the intertidal zone. There was an engineer from Vine and another from DPW on site. Why didn’t’ changes come back to the Commission? Other agencies are involved also – EPA and Corps of Engineers. Someone has to explain – realize there is some urgency to close out the project as soon as possible. Were within days of finishing when it was closed down. Shouldn’t the engineer have stopped the work? Schedule was short. It happened too quickly. McCloud made a mistake; here to make it right. Mr. Breitenstein: in terms of repairing revetment, a lot of dirt went into the water, is it a good idea to dig out, or have the boom in place for a longer period of time? Need permits from Corps and EPA, the town’s exposure is huge. Mr. O’Connell’s: the silt boom doesn’t really work well, but don’t think going out and excavating the sediment is a really good idea either. It is a mess there, plumes of sediment. Fill is in the harbor because of the seepage through the revetment. Is there an accepted way of figuring how much fill has probably gone into the harbor? Whose liability? Talking about is a plume, rocks and sediment, are we talking 5 or 10 yds? It would be an educated guess. When this was done had heavy rains. Eventually all the sediment will get reach the water. Was there a preconstruction meeting? Who was there? Mr. O’Connell had a preconstruction, but as already mentioned, only erosion controls were discussed. All other decisions were made in the field. The work did not proceed as permitted. Dealing with approved plan at the preconstruction. Peter Williams: contractor removed 200 yds from the site and also brought some in. GZA was only there on periodic site visits; DPW was there daily. Mr. O’Connell: At present time can go with the restoration plan; don’t want to be stirring up more mud and silt, so keep the silt curtain there. Mr. Shea: Plans before us have to do with restoration work, assume it has to go back to DEP. Have they been kept in the loop? Revetment is not a finished project. Believe started May 23, went out May 24, stopped work on the revetment May 26. There is a DEP File #, should be in touch with DEP. McCloud: incomplete package. Contact person would be Greg DeCesare. Before we can approve a plan, needs DEP approval. Mr. Williams: corrected work plan is bringing into project into compliance. Ran into a surplus of boulders. There will be a full reconstruction of 103’. Suggest take a look at a plan, get in touch with Peter Williams, meet on site. Give at least 3 days notice. Agree fully to coordinate the corrective work.

Show Cause Hearing: Emery, 47 Wood Ave (cutting)
Frank Snow recused himself. Christine Emery and Michael Snow were present. Mr. Shea: received a call of cutting on some town land and another property. Sent an e-mail to Christine Emery. Coastal wetland resource area and pond. Ms. Emery: Purchased this property. Have a 17-acre horse farm in Worcester and always removing invasive species. Yard was very messy, her dog is now positive for lime disease, and getting eaten up by mosquitoes. Ann McVay, neighbor, gave permission to clean up, thought it would be great because Mr. FitzGerald, former owner, always kept the area clean. Cut sumac with a hand saw. Only removed limbs to be able to bring truck in; didn’t remove any soil. Neighbor told her not to touch the reeds, which she didn’t. Found old boat and charred wood. Hired landscaper, but he had nothing to do with any cutting. Only took a couple of branches. Mr. O’Connell: sounds like vista pruning. Did not do anything with intent. Cleared on town property within the 50’ buffer. There were trash and lawn clippings. Deed was very sketchy; had it surveyed and the stone wall had been relocated. Title V done a year before. Mr. Shea: Any work done within the 100’ or 50’ buffer zone needs to come before the Commission. And to do work on someone else’s property need written permission. What if we have an after-the-fact RDA application and a letter from Mrs. McVay? Can get the dead brush out. Mr. Jones: Mike Snow, you are a contractor and should be aware of working within the 50’ or 100’ buffer.

Wetlands Hearing: Ward, 30 Indian Trail (septic)
Greg Morse, Morse Engineering, was present at the hearing. Abutters notification was submitted. Septic system repair for 4-bedroom house. Wetlands delineated by Brad Holmes. Plan shows 50’ buffer in red. Existing septic in backyard. Proposing picking up plumbing at back of house. Leaching chamber, pump chamber, and leaching bed 85’ from wetlands. Ledge outcrops along edge of property. Need to clear an area. Erosion controls proposed. Board of Health has approved. Motion to close the hearing Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Jones. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Wetlands Hearing: Corbin, 77 Cedar St (septic)
Greg Morse, Morse Engineering was present at the hearing. Abutters notification was submitted. Wetland in blue delineated by Brad Holmes. The entire property is located within 100’ buffer, with endangered species. 1500 gal monolithic tank and leaching bed, 35’ from wetland, tucked up against front property line--asked for setback variance. Erosion controls proposed. Installing in lawn, proposing to put back lawn. Ms. Scott-Pipes: couldn’t go closer to the house? 2 trees wanted to save in the front yard and water service, and the 2 cesspools are directly in front of the house. Mr. Greenbaum: two identifiable trees in work zone. Give sizes to others. One tree is about 16” diameter. Mr. Snow: Think we could request a couple of plantings? Yes. Motion to close the hearing Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Jones. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Wetlands Hearing: Grego, 319 Central Ave (addition & deck)
Neil Grego and Darren Grady, Grady Consulting were present at the hearing. Abutters notification was submitted. Proposing a small addition approximately 8’x 8’, and a 23’ x 8’ deck. Closest point is 136’ from the mean high water line of the South River. No changes of grade except installation of foundation. Proposed erosion controls. Small deck--no room for alternatives. Requires special permit from Zoning Board. Existing deck will be enclosed. Extend haybales another 20’ toward Central Ave. Motion to close the hearing Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Jones. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Jeff Hasset from McKenzie Engineering re: 214 Clapp Road - Representing Fern Properties. Requested extension for ORAD. Issued September 2006, with 2-year extension from governor, lapses Sept. 6, 2011. Flagged by John Richardson, reviewed by Lenore White for the Town. Rehung all the flags. Requesting another 3-year extension. Didn’t move any flags. Wetlands lines are the same. Paul Shea: Wetlands edge lines are good for 3 years; after 3 years the edges may change. Had 3 years, governor extended for 2 years. The problem is suddenly the ORAD went from 3 to 5 years, if extended it would bring it out to 8 years. Need a new ANRAD filing, original biologist who flagged this was John Richardson who is no longer with us. I have reviewed John’s edges for 20 years, don’t think I have ever moved flags out. File a new ANRAD, use John’s old line and check critical points, use the most upland points of the wetland edge line. Make sure there are no other areas of isolated wetlands. Someone else flagged wetland 3 years ago and it changed completely. To allow the edge for 8 years should not be allowed. Mr. Greenbaum: your interpretation of the extension doesn’t apply to ANRADs. No, it applies. At minimum, walk the property to see that the line still looks good. Go through the normal review and the normal process. Mr. Hasset: have extended other ANRADs in other towns. Willing to file an ANRAD. Wanted time line. Submit it within a few days and can get it on the next agenda. Mr. Shea: if you file a new ANRAD you then have the valid wetland line for the next 3 years. If Commission approves the wetlands from 2006, it puts you wide open for an appeal, could have whole project on hold. Need to hire a consultant. If 2 or 3 are picked, will have to go out to bid. The TA has suggested Paul Shea could review wetland lines. Mr. Jones: historically this is a sensitive piece of property.

Agent’s Report/Mr. Shea: 88 Country Way hired Brook Monroe and asked for 45-day extension. At least going to get an edge line.
31 Candlewood approved restoration within the BVW while in low flow conditions. Wants the BVW work done now; no date in writing. Planting plan by September 1; 50’ buffer by September 1.

Mr. Snow: Trail work at Ellis & Driftway done every year by some special needs kids through the school, with Skip Toomey supervising and Allan Greenberg’s assistance on behalf of the Commission. Appropriate $2500 from either the Driftway or Conservation fund: only trouble is they are not reimbursed any more through Town Meeting.

Agent’s Report/Mr. O’Connell: Update Scituate Marine Park, 117 & 119 Edward Foster Rd
Still not clear; was ready to lift Enforcement Order, then changed his mind. Wanted to allow work on embankment. As a result of a Friday meeting, 2 or 3 more companies are involved. Wetland Scientists are coming from another company. Wanted something in writing that subcontracted to a wetland scientist. The reason it was stopped was silt fence went in the marsh. The salt marsh is filled. Recommended LEC go out and calculate amount of fill. Approximately 150 cu yds; thinks it will be much more disruptive to remove, already proposing to plant marsh, trading a little bit of fill for more marsh planting. Walkway is in a different location, supposedly won’t cause flooding. Ms. Scott-Pipes: material is wrong; not impervious, but not very pervious either. Needs to be ADA compliant. Part of walkway by the marsh, believes in original location. Stormwater not taken care of. Going back to Tibbetts Engineering, want water flow diagrams, need to look at and tell us which way the water flows.

Order of Conditions: Kessinger, 154 Jericho Rd (repair drive/replenish bank/repair & add to deck)
Motion to condition the project Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Jones. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Order of Conditions: Frost, 146 Tilden Rd (addition with deck/plantings)
Motion to condition the project Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Jones. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Order of Conditions: Malone, 6 Utility Rd (2 additions)
Motion to condition the project Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Jones. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Order of Conditions: Campbell, 278 Central Ave. (pre-storm landscaping/grading)
Motion to condition the project Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Jones. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Order of Conditions: Hand, 264 Central Ave. (lift addition to deck)
Motion to condition the project Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Jones. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Order of Conditions: Linburn, 35 Tilden Rd (septic)
Motion to condition the project Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Jones. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

Order of Conditions: Martin, 159 Turner Rd (removal of over wash)
Motion to condition the project Ms. Scott-Pipes. Second Mr. Jones. Motion passed by unanimous vote.

CORRESPONDENCE
June 28, 2011 – July 18, 2011
1. BOS Thank you letter to Joe Urbanski for serving on the Commission. (filed)
2. DEP Notification date: May 27, 2011--Waterways application by Michael Solimando to amend Lice #12275 – change from public to private marina
3. Request for Emergency repair at 15 Eagles Nest Rd., seawall and cliff
4. DEP File #68-2339 – Malone, 6 Utility Rd (in file)
5. DEP File #68-2340 – Campbell, 278 Central Ave (in file)
6. DEP File #68-2341 – Linburn, 35 Tilden Rd (in file)
7. DEP File #68-2342 – Martin, 159 Turner Rd (in file)
8. DEP File #68-2343 – O’Brien, 29 Surfside Rd (in file)
9. DEP File #68-2344 – Hand, 264 Central Ave. (in file)
10. DEP File #68-2345 – Sullivan, 159 Summer St (in file)
11. Pumping requirement for 20 Postscript Lane – 68-615
12. Audubon Society – Sanctuary Magazine
13. Division of Marine Fisheries – re: Dowd-Pizzuto, 7 Berry Lane: 3 comments
14. Request for Extension of ORAD, 214 Clapp Rd. Issued 9/7/06, had the state’s automatic extension.
15. Reappointment of Paul Parys to ConCom
16. Recording of CofC re: 68-1719 – 75 River St (in file)
17. River Watch Newsletter
18. Abutters’ notification for 30 Indian Trail (in file)
19. Abutters’ notification for 77 Cedar St (in file)
20. Abutters’ notification for 159 Summer St (in file)
21. Harrington, re: 88 Country Way – 1. Hired Biologist, Brooke Monroe; 2. Request an extension of 45 days (in file)
22. Request for CofC Polcari, 46 Atlantic Dr – 68-1714 (in file)
23. E-mail from Jim O’Connell to Christine Emery, 47 Wood Ave. re: Show Cause Hearing.
24. Request for maintenance Order for 274 Central Ave – 68-2328 (in file)
25. Recording of OofC for 68-2329 – 53 Lighthouse Rd (in file)
26. Mass Wildlife News
27. Request to remove Order #29 – (removable panels) from McNamara, 83 Surfside Rd – 68-2326 (in file)
28. Request from Paul Shea for additional plantings for 146 Tilden Rd
29. Received revised plan for plantings at 146 Tilden Rd (in file)
30. Recording of OofC for 68-2274 – Informational update (in file)
31. DPW re: Haly, 26 Wilshire Dr – not Town-owned land, private lot owned by 32 Lauren Lane, cannot remove tree.
32. Recording of OofC for Perry, 105 Gilson Rd (in file)
33. Marine Fisheries – DMF News
34. Stormwater Magazine
35. Form A – 543 Country Way – COMMENTS by July 12, 2011
36. Mass Audubon - Coastal Waterbird Program
37. DEP File #8-2346 – Balog/Demers, 39 Bayberry Lane (in file)
38. ISO – Jimmy Chin re: 2010 CRS Cycle Application
39. MassWildlife News
40. MassWildlife News
41. Recording of OofC for 68-2332 – Joy, 262 Central Ave. (in file)
42. Request for Emergency Sand Removal at 8 Peggotty Beach Rd (in RDA file)
43. Request for continuance Farina, #10 & 12 Ocean Dr & 24 Humarock Beach for 4 weeks (in file)
44. Request for continuance for Seoane, 172 Gannett Rd for 2 weeks (in file)
45. DEP File #68-2347 – Wood, 126 Captain Peirce Rd (in file)
46. DEP File #68-2348 – Ward, 30 Indian Trail (in file)
47. DEP File #68-2349 – Corbin, 77 Cedar St (in file)
48. Request for CofC for 68-1991 – 45 Surfside Rd (in file)
49. MassWildlife News
50. Recording of OofC for 68-2316 - 254 Central Ave. (in file)

Meeting adjourned 10:05 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Carol Logue, Secretary