HomeMy Public PortalAbout2022 10 11 Public Meeting PacketAdministrative Review
Conservation Commission Meeting - October 11, 2022
Administrative Report – David Karam, 330 Main Street, SE 9-1939
Memo to: Brewster Conservation Commission
From: Chris Miller and Andreana Sideris
RE: Notice of Intent & Show Cause Hearing 330 Main Street, 15/20 (21/30-19)
Notice of Intent
David Karam proposes to revegetate a previously cleared area in addition to a former gravel parking area and
patio with native plant species within 50 and 100 feet of inland wetlands at 330 Main Street, 15/20 (21/30-19).
October 11, 2022 Hearing
Staff Comments:
Notice of Intent filed on September 22, 2022.
Landscape management plan submitted by Ponderosa Landscaping.
o Planting include 8 trees and 14 shrubs
o 3 River Birch trees (not native) have been replaced by (native) Tupelo (Nyssa sylvatica)
o We received a signed letter from abutter Leigh Poltrock for work to occur on her property, with conditions
o To close out existing order for construction of house and barn, would require a plan by a PE.
Recommend: Continue hearing to October 27, 2022 to draft an Order of Conditions
Show Cause Hearing
Karam, 330 Main Street, 15/20 (21/30-19), construction of addition, retaining walls and patios, vegetation clearing
within 50 and 100 feet of inland wetlands
October 11, 2022 Hearing
Staff Comments:
Notice of Intent filed on September 22, 2022.
Landscape management plan submitted by Ponderosa Landscaping.
o Planting include 8 trees and 14 shrubs
o Plan not stamped by PLS
o To close out existing order for construction of house and barn, would require a plan by a PE.
Recommend: If the Commission is comfortable with the NOI filing, than I recommend satisfying the Enforcement Order
once the Order of Conditions has been recorded.
Administrative Review
Conservation Commission Meeting - October 11, 2022
September 27, 2022 Hearing
Site Visit: Site Visit Completed
Staff Comments:
Notice of Intent filed on September 22, 2022.
Landscape management plan submitted by Ponderosa Landscaping.
o Planting include 8 trees and 14 shrubs
o Plan not stamped by PLS
o To close out existing order for construction of house and barn, would require a plan by a PE.
Recommend: Continue hearing to October 11, 2022
From Previous Meetings:
Reported Activities: Relocation of stones, removal of plastic grass (replanting with clover), plantings within the
50 foot buffer, removal of wood retaining wall, discussion with abutting property owner as to planting choices for
restoration area.
Recommend: Filing of NOI to cover alterations not originally permitted
LAST NEW PLANS SUBMITTED : Delineation Plan
Unpermitted Alterations Within 50 Foot Buffer
Retaining walls, patios, and cleared vegetation
o requirements – revegetation of cleared areas with native shrubs and grasses
o requirements - retreat of unpermitted structures within the 50 foot buffer as unpermitted alterations that
would not meet the requirements of a variance:
1. Mitigating measures are proposed that will allow the project to be conditioned so that it contributes to the
protection of the resource values identified in the Wetlands Bylaw; and for a permanent alteration within the 50
foot buffer, the mitigation would be 2:1 with a planting area within the 50 foot buffer – by removing the potential for
vegetation already by the propose project, this will not meet this standard.
2. The Conservation Commission finds no reasonable alternative for such a project within the proposed site; and the
reasonable alternative is to retreat the retaining wall and the features they support to the 50 foot buffer line. The
expanded patios are not necessary for the use of a property.
3. There will be no adverse impact from the proposed project; the removal of the area from being able to provide a
place for vegetation to grow is an adverse impact. The 50 foot buffer and wetland areas are protected from any
significant removals or alterations excepting those that meet the above requirements and can be demonstrated to
be necessary and the least impactful option.
Do not want to incentivize unpermitted construction/expansions within the 50 foot buffer/wetlands without
approval.
TOWN OF BREWSTER
NATURAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
1657 MAIN STREET
BREWSTER, MA 02631
PHONE: (508) 896-4546
FAX: (508) 896-8089
CONSERVATION@BREWSTER-MA.GOV
OFFICE OF
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Notice of Intent Filing Checklist
Before you submit your Notice of Intent to the Conservation Commission and other applicable
agencies, please complete and sign this checklist, showing that you understand and have
completed all of the forms and procedures required for a Notice of Intent filing. The
Conservation Commission will not open the hearing if the filing is not complete.
The Conservation Commission requires one (1) complete electronic copy and three (3)
complete paper copies of the Notice of Intent and attached plan(s) for each filing.
Include each item of the application, with pages numbered consecutively and in the order
designated on this checklist. Staple these pages together, and attach the plan(s) with a
paper clip. Collectively, each item of the application and the plan(s) represent one
complete copy. In addition, the Conservation Commission members require a copy of the
plan(s) and a copy of the narrative/variance request rather than full copies of the Notice of
Intent. Please include ten (10) copies of the plan(s) with a copy of the
narrative/variance request stapled to each.
Unless a digital application was submitted to the Massachusetts Department of
Environmental Protection, one complete paper copy of the NOI should be sent by US
Certified, Return Receipt Mail, to the DEP Southeast Regional Office, 20 Riverside Drive,
Lakeville, MA, 02347. Submit the Certified Receipt Postal Service Form 3800 to the
Conservation Commission.
Submit only ONE copy of this checklist.
Components of the Application
1. Contact the Brewster Assessors' Office to provide to you a certified abutter’s list and a
photocopy of the appropriate section of the Town of Brewster Assessors' Map, showing the
property of your project and all abutting properties required for a legal wetland filing under the
Brewster Wetlands By-law. This list will provide the names of all direct abutters to the
property (first abutters), all that abut the first abutters (second abutters) if they are within 300
feet of the lot lines of the property, and lot(s) directly across the street from your lot. The
street is the first abutter and lots directly across, second abutters.
If abutters are in another town, obtain a certified list of these abutters from the assessors'
office in that town, and submit it and the appropriate assessors’ map in the application also.
2. Notify all abutters on the list of your proposed project on the “Notice to Abutters” form
letter, by certified, return receipt mail before or on the day of filing, and submit the Certified
Mail Receipts (Form 3800) as part of the filing. Submit the Certified Mail Receipt of the
application sent to the DEP and, if applicable, the MA Division of Fisheries and Wildlife ’s
Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program. Submit the US Postal Service Form 3811
at the hearing.
3. Complete and include all applicable sections of the Notice of Intent (WPA Form 3).
4. Include MA Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) State Appendix G. Field
Data Form(s) for bordering vegetated wetlands and other indicators of wetland hydrology.
Submit one form for each area tested; one form for the wetland area and one for upland.
5. Include a photocopy of an 8" by 10" section of the appropriate United States Geological
Survey (USGS) Quadrangle Map clearly showing the location of the project.
6. If applicable, send copies of the Notice of Intent application and supporting documents by
return receipt mail to the Massachusetts Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program,
the US Army Corps of Engineers, etc. Submit these certified mail receipts (Form 3800) to the
Conservation Department.
7. Calculate the DEP fee on the DEP Wetland Fee Transmittal Form and include it with the
application. Send the form with a check or money order for the state share, to the DEP Lock Box.
Include a copy of the fee transmittal form and the check in the filing.
8. Include a clear, comprehensive narrative, describing all aspects of the project.
9. Include the Brewster Wetlands Protection By-law Notice of Intent Addendum.
10. If applicable to this filing, include a variance request with alternatives analysis.
11. If applicable to this filing, include a copy of the “Appendix A MA Historical Commission”
MHC) form; the original of which shall be sent to MHC by certified, return receipt mail, and the
Form 3800 to the Conservation Department with the other return receipts. At this time, the
Brewster Conservation Commission requires this notification only in cases in which the lot is
undisturbed by an existing structure.
12. Calculate the town filing fee on the Brewster WP By-law Transmittal Form, and add the
advertising fee, processing & mailing fee, and the town portion of the state fee in the area
provided. Include this with the application.
13. Include one check or money order for the total amount designated on the Brewster WP
By-law Transmittal Form.
14. Include a copy of the “Notice to Abutters” form letter.
15. Include a professional site plan, scale, 1" = 20'’, clearly showing:
In color, the wetland line (green), fifty foot buffer zone (red) and one hundred-foot
buffer zone (dark blue) delineations,
wetland flags numbered to correspond with each Field Data Form,
topography (minimum 2 foot), contour line and spot elevation,
the insignia of the applicable professional(s) who designed the plan, in compliance with
the Brewster Conservation Commission Policy for Plans for Wetlands Permitting of
3/8/05.
All site plans; original and revised, shall show the wetland and buffer zones in color.
16. Include elevation drawings of the proposed structure(s) on paper of 8 1/2" x 11" or 11" x 17".
17. If the lot is an undeveloped, secluded, or otherwise unidentifiable area, identify the lot on
the plan by the number of the nearest telephone pole or the nearest road intersection. If there is
no pole on the lot, describe the lot's proximity to the nearest; for example, "the lot is twelve feet
east of telephone pole no.167".
18. Fold each plan separately, right side out with title visible, and attach it to each copy of the
application.
19. Include signed Site Access Authorization Form. Conservation Commissioners and Department
staff will inspect the site.
20. Properly stake and flag the project site to identify all required portions of the project, prior to
the day of filing.
Clearly stake all boundaries and limits of work.
Clearly identify all stakes and flags in the field, showing the one hundred foot and 50
foot buffer zones and all wetland areas.
Designate each wetland type on the flag as "BVW" (bordering vegetated wetland),
TOB" (top of bank), "LSF" (land subject to flooding), etc.
Unless a holiday interferes, the filing deadline for all applications is noon on the Thursday at least
ten (10) business days before the hearing. The hearing must be advertised in a local newspaper
at this time, the Cape Codder Newspaper) no less than five business days before a hearing.
When a holiday interferes with the Friday production, the newspaper will notify the town of its
earlier deadline.
Additional information or revised plans for continued hearings must be submitted no later than
Monday at 4:00 PM, eight (8) days prior to the hearing. Submit ten (10) copies, paper clip
documents to the folded plan.
Anyone proposing a structure within 50 feet of a wetland resource area shall contact the
Brewster Zoning Agent before the Conservation Commission will open your hearing.
I, _________________________________ , confirm that this application is complete
Environmental consultant/engineer/surveyor
N
Brewster Conservation Commission
Notice of Intent Addendum
Brewster Wetlands Protection By-law Chapter 172
Within 100 feet of the following - check all applicable resource areas:
Coastal Wetlands
Coastal Bank
Coastal Dune
Coastal Beach
Coastal Marsh
Flat
Ocean
Estuary
Land Subject to Flooding or Inundation by Tidal Action
Land Subject to Flooding by Coastal Storm Flowage
Inland Wetlands
Inland Bank
Meadow
Marsh
Bog
Swamp
Lake
Pond
River
Stream
Land Under Said Waters
Land Subject to Flooding or Inundation by Groundwater or Surface Water
Are you proposing an activity on land within 50 feet of any resource area protected
under the Town of Brewster Wetlands Protection By-law?
Yes
No
If your answer to the above is yes, are you requesting a variance pursuant to
Part 5 of the regulations promulgated pursuant to the Brewster Wetlands
Protection By-law?
Yes
No
If so, please describe on a separate sheet in complete detail using the Brewster
Wetlands Protection By-law Variance Justification form, the reasons for the
variance, and the facts upon which the Commission should find that there has
been a clear and convincing showing that the proposed work and its natural and
consequential effects will not have any adverse effect upon any of the interests
specified in the By-law and listed on the variance justification form.
Is the lot to be altered by the proposed work currently unaltered (without a
structure), and located on the Brewster Archaeological Sensitivity Map
available for view in the Conservation Department) with respect to historic or
prehistoric (archaeological) interests?
Yes
No
If both apply, have you completed and mailed by certified mail or hand delivery
the attached 950 CMR State Appendix A form from the Massachusetts Historical
Commission, so that the Commission shall have received the Appendix A
response prior to the filing of the Notice of Intent?
Yes
No
Code of the Town of Brewster Wetlands Protection Chapter
172 Brewster Wetlands Protection By-law Fee Schedule
Category Activities and Fees
Variance Fees:
a) New structure or expanded structure within 50 feet of wetland resources: $500
b) New stairs or docks within 50 feet of wetland resources: $250
c) Maintenance or rebuilding of existing structure, stairs, or docks within 50 feet of
wetland resources, no expansion within 50 feet of wetland resources: $200
d) Work without structure (landscaping, vista pruning, habitat
improvement/restoration, invasive plant removal, etc.) within 50 feet of wetland
resources: $200
e) Beach nourishment and/or Sand Drift Fence: $100
Category 1 (Fee for each activity is $100)
a) work on a single family lot: pool, etc.
b) site work without a house;
c) control of vegetation;
d) beach nourishment and/or sand drift fence
e) resource improvement;
f) work on a septic system separate from house;
g) monitoring well activities minus roadway;
h) new agricultural or aquacultural projects.
Category 2 (Fee for each activity is $250.00):
a) construction of single family house (SFH);
b) addition to a single family dwelling
c) parking lot
d) electric generating facility activities;
e) inland limited projects minus road crossings and agriculture
f) each (stream) crossing for driveway to SFH;
g) each point source (storm drain) discharge;
h) control vegetation in a development;
i) water level variation;
j) any other activity not in Categories 1 through 12;
k) water supply exploration.
Category 3 (Fee for each activity is $750):
a) site preparation (for development other than a single family dwelling) beyond NOI
scope;
b) each building (for development other than a single family dwelling) including site;
c) road construction; not crossing or driveway;
d) hazardous cleanup;
e) water supply development.
Category 4 (Fee for each activity is $750):
a) each (stream) crossing for development other than a single family dwelling or
commercial road;
b) dam, sluiceway, tidegate (safety) work;
c) landfills operation/closures;
d) sand and gravel operation;
e) railroad line construction;
f) bridge;
g) hazardous waste alterations to resource area;
h) dredging;
i) package treatment plant & discharge;
j) airport tree clearing;
k) oil and/or hazardous material release response actions.
Category 5
a) (Fee for each activity is $500) work on inland docks, piers, revetments, dikes,
etc.
b) (Fee for each activity is $750) work on coastal docks, piers, coastal revetments,
seawalls, etc.
Category 6 Installation or Repair of Public Utilities $300
Other Permits or Requests
Category 7 Request for Determination: $75
Category 8 Abbreviated Notice of Resource Area Delineation - Boundary delineation
for Bordering Vegetated Wetlands - Fee is $1 per linear foot, but not to exceed $100 for
activities associated with a single family home or $1,000 for all other activities.
Category 9 Amended Order of Conditions: $150
Category 10 Extension Permit: $100
Category 11 Certificate of Compliance (submit two copies of the state form): $100
Category 12 Administrative Review Project: $30
In addition to the listed fees, an amount of $15 is assessed to cover the cost of
advertising the hearing in a local newspaper.
The Applicant may file a Request for Determination for Water Quality Improvements;
there will be no additional fee for these variance requests.
Please Note
Each fee for work that commenced prior to obtaining a permit from the Conservation
Commission (after-the-fact) is double the assessed fee (activity fee and variance fee).
75.00/hour is assessed for office or on-site consultation in excess of 1/2 hour, and for
permit over-site and/or environmental monitoring.
Policy for Permitting Water Quality Improvement Projects
The Brewster Conservation Commission encourages projects designed to improve the
water quality of ponds and other wetlands in Brewster. When projects are limited in scope
to solely providing water quality improvements and involve no expansion of existing
development, the Commission will consider a Request for Determination of Applicability
RDA) combined with a variance request, where applicable. If a project shows clear
evidence that it should improve water quality, and is therefore deemed by the
Conservation Commission to be a Water Quality Improvement Project, any fee for a
variance request would be waived (this would need to be reflected in the fee schedule
under the by-law). Examples of projects that would qualify as Water Quality Improvement
Projects would be small-scale aeration, circulation, or de-stratification proposals for water
bodies, small-scale stormwater treatment proposals, or bank stabilization projects.
Fee for processing and mailing wetland permits (Notice of Intent, Request for
Determination of Applicability, and Abbreviated Notice of Resource Area
Delineation) Processing and Mailing fee: $20.00. This includes the original by
certified mail, and one copy plus information letter and site inspection form, to
the owner of record.*
Many properties have multiple owners. The Conservation Commission assesses a
charge of $.05 per page plus cost of mailing for extra copies or for copies to
second owners, etc., in addition to the $20.00 mailing fee.
Massachusetts 310 CMR Department of Environmental Protection 10.05 (3). (e)
The Order shall be mailed by certified mail (return receipt requested) or hand
delivered to the applicant or his agent or attorney...”,
WPA Form 5 Order of Conditions Massachusetts Wetlands Protection ACT
M.G.L.c. 131,§40 “A copy also must be mailed or hand delivered at the same time
to the ....property owner, if different from applicant”.
The Conservation Commission shall review all fee revisions one year from the effective
date of approval to determine if further changes are necessary.
Code of the Town of Brewster
Wetlands Protection Chapter 172
Brewster Wetlands Protection By-law
Wetlands Fee Transmittal Form (SAMPLE)
Fee Categories
The feemust becalculated using the following process andworksheet and included inthe Notice
of Intent or Abbreviated Notice of Resource Area Delineation Application:
Step 1/Type of Activity: Describe each type of activity (from the Category of Activities and Fees) which
will occur in a wetland resource area and buffer zone. If a variance is requested, add "w/var." - for
example: Cat. 1a): work on a single family lot: addition w/var.
Step 2/Number of Activities: Identify the number of each type of activity.
Step 3/Individual Activity Fee: Identify the fee associated with each type of activity using the categories
of projects and fees listed. Add applicable variance fee for each activity requiring a variance.
Step 4/Subtotal Activity Fee: Multiply the number of activities (identified in Step 2) times the fee
per category (identified in Step 3) to reach a subtotal fee amount.
Step 5/Total Project Fee: Determine the total BWP By-law fee for the project by adding the
subtotal amounts identified in Step 4.
Step 6/Advertising Fee: Add $15 for advertising.
Step 7/Processing and Mailing Fee: Add $20 for processing and mailing
Step 8/Town Portion of State Fee: Amount calculated in Massachusetts NOI Wetland Fee
Transmittal Form, WPA Form 3.
Step 9/Total Paid to the Town of Brewster: Total of By-law fee, consultant fee, advertising fee,
processing & mailing fee, and town portion of state fee. Make checks payable to the Town of
Brewster.
Calculating wetland Notice of Intent Filing Fees (Example)
1/Type of Activity 2/Number of 3/Individual Fee 4/Subtotal
Activities
Construction of single family dwelling ____1_____ $250.00__ _$250.00____
Variance__________________ ____1_____ __$500.00__ _ $500.00___
Step 5/Total BWP By-law Project Fee: ____$750.00__
Step 6/Advertising Fee: ____$15.00___
Step 7/Processing & Mailing Fee: ____$20.00___
Step 8/Town Portion of State Fee: ____$137.50__
Step 9/Total Paid to the Town of Brewster ____$922.50__
Code of the Town of Brewster
Wetlands Protection Chapter 172
Brewster Wetlands Protection By-law
Wetlands Fee Transmittal Form
Fee Categories
The fee must be calculated using the following process and worksheet and included in the Notice
ofIntent or Abbreviated Notice of Resource Area Delineation Application:
Step 1/Type of Activity: Describe each type of activity (from the Category of Activities and Fees) which
will occur in a wetland resource area and buffer zone. If a variance is requested, add "w/var." - for
example: Cat. 1a): work on a single family lot: addition w/var.
Step 2/Number of Activities: Identify the number of each type of activity.
Step 3/Individual Activity Fee: Identify the fee associated with each type ofactivity using the categories
of projects and fees listed. Add applicable variance fee for each activity requiring a variance.
Step 4/Subtotal Activity Fee: Multiply the number of activities (identified in Step 2) times the fee
per category (identified in Step 3) to reach a subtotal fee amount.
Step 5/Total Project Fee: Determine the total BWP By-law fee for the project by adding the
subtotal amounts identified in Step 4.
Step 6/Advertising Fee: Add $15 for advertising
Step 7/Processing and Mailing Fee: Add $20 for processing and mailing
Step 8/Town Portion of State Fee: Amount calculated in Massachusetts NOI Wetland Fee
Transmittal Form, WPA Form 3.
Step 9/Total Paid to the Town of Brewster: Total of By-law fee, consultant fee, advertising fee,
processing & mailing fee, and town portion of state fee. Make checks payable to the Town of
Brewster.
Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4
Type of Activity Number of Individual Subtotal
Activities Activity Fee
Step 5/ Total BWP By-Law Project Fee
Step 6/Advertising Fee: $____________
Step 7/Processing & Mailing Fee: $____________
Step 8/Town Portion of State Fee: $____________
Step 9/Total Paid to the Town of Brewster: $____________
Submit only this page of the Fee Schedule with the Notice of Intent.
Karam Residence, 330 &324 Main St., Brewster, MA October 4, 2022
NARRATIVE REVISION FOR THE PROPOSED LANDSCAPE PLAN
Refer to the Landscape Plan of September 15, 2022, Revised October 4, 2022, “Native Plant Mitigation”.
Mitigation and vegetation restoration change:
Note that we have changed the variety of one of the trees in the plant list. Use 3 Nyssa sylvatica
(Tupelo, or Sour Gum) in place of the 3 Betula nigra (River Birch). The revised landscape plan of October
4, 2022 shows the change.
Thank you.
Charles Wentz, Representative
Ponderosa Landscaping
89.83'deck deckdeckexisting path RESIDENCE 508-255-4773
508-255-4773
Kerlin Residence217 Crocker LaneBrewster, MA
Karam Residence
330 Main St.
Brewster, MA
February 3, 2022
September 15, 2022
“Native Plant Mitigation”
“Native Plant Mitigation”
14
14
Locus, not to scale
Locus, not to scale
x
x
~N
~N
BreakwaterRoad Orleans
Orleans
Crocker LaneRoute 124
Route
124
Route 6A
Route 6A
Rosa virginina Virginia Rose #36 ~N
~N
Symbol
Symbol
Name
Name
PLANT KEY
PLANT KEY
Bayberry
Bayberry
Myrica pensylvanica
Myrica pensylvanica
Size
Size
Quantity
Quantity
#1#3
#3
6
6
10Total of 39 plants as mitigationApproximate locations noted on plan
Total of 39 plants as mitigation
Approximate locations noted on plan
Comptomia peregrina Sweet Fern Existing Cedar treesExisting Oak treesExisting Black Cherry trees Existing Viburnum shrubsexistingBeach Plum existingBeach PlumBittersweet BittersweetCedar Tree
Cedar Tree
Juniper virginianaJuniper virginiana 3
3
View Corridor View CorridorPrunus maritimaBeach Plum #3Panicum virgatumSwitch Grass95 Existing Cedar New Cedar tree Plant PanicumvirgatumSwitch grass Approximatelocations ofexisting Black Cherry treesBayberry shrubsPlant Cedar trees, approx locations Existing Oakcontrol spread ofBitter sweet. Physical removal. Use herbicide,Glysophate, if needed,cut and swipe method. Various applicationsto be reviewed and controlled annuallyas needed.Install Temporary Drip Irrigation for the new plants for their survival. until they adapt and acclimate themselves
Install Temporary Drip Irrigation
for the new plants for their survival.
until they adapt and acclimate themselves
100 Ft. from thetop of the Coastal Bank 50 Ft. from thetop of the Coastal Bank ~Top of Coastal Bank PlantBeach PlumPlant Rosa virginianaarea has mostlyBeach Plum shrubsto be kept at a staggeredheight of about 4’-6’ area has mostlyBeach Plum shrubsto be kept at a staggeredheight of about 6’-8’,Lateral Prune Cherrybranches if needed area has mostlyBeach Plum shrubsto be kept at a staggeredheight of about 5’-7’ plant sweet Fernplant Bayberrywith the existingCedar trees 26 26 24 22 2220 20181614 12 10~28’ elevationLateral Pruning wasdone to selected BeachPlum shrubs, Fall, 2021.the plants will grow back existingHoneysuckleshrubsremainExisting Cedar Treewas topped and pruned Fall, 2021. Tree should be ok,can perform some corrective cuts for the health of the tree Lateral pruning was done to selected branchesof the existing Black Cherry trees, Fall, 2021. They will grow back, no apparent serious damage was noted. Branches were pruned from the 2 Existing Oak trees near the topof the bank. They should grow outwith new growth in the spring.Corrective pruning can be performedfor the health of the trees. There is an option to flush cut these, then allow for stump growth, and plant new trees elsewhere in the buffer zone. #3#3 #2OVALS: Comments designatedin the ovals represent areas where pruning was done by others without permission from the Brewster Conservation Commission. Overall the plants should comeback okay. Some corrective pruning can be performed as noted. See the mitigation planting list above, which includes 3 trees to be planted within the 50’ buffer zone. Plantswill increase vegetation and shouldcompensate well for pruning performed, Fall, 2021, and previous stormdamaged removal of Pitch Pine. Pitch Pine was removed from this area. It was wind damaged in a heavy storms in aprevious year and removed without notifying the Conservation Commission.. Mitigation plants will be planted to compensatefor that loss(Approximate locations)Symbol NamePLANT KEYBayberryMyrica pensylvanica SizeIlex glabra, InkberryRosa virginina Virginia RosePanicum virgatum Switch GrassQuantity #1#1#1#3#3#3#3#3#22082112Total of 103 plants as mitigationClethra alnifolia Summer-sweetEchinaceae ConeflowerAsclepias Butterfly WeedRudbekia ConeflowerViburnum dentatum Arrowwood 1055397 Baccharis halimifolia Groundsel bush3Hydrangea Nikko Blue #5#3 Symbol NamePLANT KEYBayberryMyrica pensylvanica SizeIlex glabra, InkberryRosa virginina Virginia RosePanicum virgatum Switch GrassQuantity #1#1#1#3#3
#3
#3#3#3
#3
#22082112Total of 103 plants as mitigationClethra alnifolia Summer-sweet
Clethra alnifolia
Summer-sweet
Echinaceae ConeflowerAsclepias Butterfly WeedRudbekia ConeflowerViburnum dentatum Arrowwood
Viburnum dentatum
Arrowwood
10553
3
97
7
Baccharis halimifolia Groundsel bush3Hydrangea Nikko Blue #5#3Selected Existing TreesBlack LocustOak TreesMaple Tree(looks like Norway Maple)PLANT KEY, Symbols and namesDay Lilly Stella DoroHolly, Soft Touch Japanese Holly LilacHydrangea p. quickfireBayberryBearberry Rose knockout BlushingSpirea WateriDay Lilly Happy Returns Purple PlumPanicum v. Heavy MetalPennisetum Morning Light, transplantsSedum Autumn JoySedum KamtschaticumViburnum dentatumLavender hidcoteInkberryClethra Humming BirdHydrangea Coerulea Lace Nepeta Walker’s LowHydrangea Oakleaf Spirea Little PrincessRoas FairyShasta DaisyHelleborus Jacob, cinnamon snow Juniper procumbens nana Symbol NamePLANT KEYBayberryMyrica pensylvanica SizeIlex glabra, InkberryRosa virginina Virginia RosePanicum virgatum Switch GrassQuantity #1#3#3#3#3#3#2Total of 306 plants as mitigation, on the slope,along the property line, and around the houseClethra alnifolia Summer-sweetViburnum dentatum Arrowwood ArctostaphylosBearberrySelected Existing trees,as labeled1545103342727NATIVE PLANTSNON-NATIVE PLANTS near house::Hydrangea Endless SummerHydrangea p. Bobo #5#5Lavandula Hidcote #130811
Stony Brook Rd
Candlestick
Lane
A P
Newcomb
Rd.
330 Main St, Rt. 6A
Acer Rubrum
Red Maple
Betula nigra
River Birch
Pinus strobus
White Pine
Symbol
Symbol
Symbol
Symbol
Name
Name
Name
Name
PLANT KEY
PLANT KEY
Bayberry
Bayberry
Myrica pensylvanica
Myrica pensylvanica
Size
Size
Size
Size
Quantity
Quantity
Quantity
Quantity
#3
#3
6
9
Total of 39 plants as mitigation. Approximate locations noted on plan
Totals: 10 trees, 30 shrubs, plus 20 ferns as mitigation. Approximate locations noted on plan
3
3
1
#3
#3
#3
#3
Clethra alnifolia
Summer-sweet
Clethra alnifolia
Summer-sweet
Viburnum dentatum
Arrowwood
Viburnum dentatum
Arrowwood
3
6
7
5
Acer Rubrum
Red Maple
Acer Rubrum
Red Maple
Betula nigra
River Birch
Nyssa sylvatica
Tupelo/Sour Gum
Pinus strobus
White Pine
Pinus strobus
White Pine
#7
#7
#7
#10
#10
#10
#10
4
Artificail Turf, replace with
Fescue grass mix or
Harmony grass seed mix
Artificial Turf has
been removed
Removed timber
planter (Hatched area)
plant native Ferns
amongst existing
plants
The retaining wall in this area has been removed.
Add clean fill and loam to restore the natural slope.
Plant native shrubs, install initial layer of
pine bark mulch and allow the area to go natural.
The retaining wall in this
area has been removed
( Hatched area).
Base Plan done by Jason Ellis
Plant native trees
in the “Cleared Area”
as mitigation
89.83'
Allow for mowing around the plants
once or twice a year for up to three
years to help keep open area for
the growth of the new plants and reduce
invasive plant population. Over-seed
areas with a native seed mix to
help restore native forbes.
Cedar Tree
Juniper virginiana2
Osmunda cinnamomea
Cinnamon Fern
Reduce the size of the
pervious shell sitting area
plant native ferns to existing
plantings
20
revised, October 4, 2022
Administrative Review
Conservation Commission Meeting - October 11, 2022
Administrative Report – Heidi Stam, 127 Hillbourne Terrace, SE 9-1938
Memo to: Brewster Conservation Commission
From: Chris Miller and Andreana Sideris
RE: Notice of Intent, 127 Hillbourne Terrace 115/26 (9/18-18)
Resource Areas: Coastal Bank, BVW
Relevant Site History:
Aug 1996 - Partial COC issued, SE 9-682. Condition #28 regarding vegetation of disturbed areas with native
plant material (NW portion of the property), not yet in compliance
Jul 2010 - COC issued for partial COC, SE 9-682.
Mar 2021 - Administrative Review, removal of one pine tree
Apr 2021 - Unpermitted Vegetation Cutting, tree topping
Notice of Intent
Heidi Stam proposes to maintain a vista corridor, remove invasive species and install native plantings on and
within 50 feet of coastal resources at 127 Hillbourne Terrace, 115/26 (9/18-18).
October 11, 2022 Hearing
Staff Comments:
Revised site plans from Crawford Land Management and Down Cape Engineering were submitted to the
Commission on October 4, 2022
Supplemental materials from the property owner were submitted to the Commission on October 4, 2022 showing
20 years of vegetation management on the bank, suggesting that this cutting has occurred before the date of
purchase in 2010.
Comments on the revised Restoration Plan include:
o The approximate number of previously pruned seedling or sapling specimens for removal and re-
vegetation with native shrubs has been reduced from 28 to 23.
o The specimens for removal will be re-vegetated with native shrubs at a 2:1 ratio, resulting in the planting
of 46 native shrubs
o The landscape fabric is proposed to be removed by hand in areas where it is exposed, and left alone in
areas where native groundcovers have established
o 2” Pitch pine and Cedar Seedling is proposed to be relocated outside of the view corridor, this transplant
should abide by the 2:1 mitigation ratio (as it is the same concept as cutting down a tree and replanting
one outside of the corridor)
o The proposed pruning zones shall only affect the trees within the view corridor, as the native shrubs
proposed for plantings are unlikely to exceed the minimum pruning height requirements
Winterberry (Ilex verticillata) grows to 15’
Black Chokeberry (Aronia melanocarpa) grows to 10’
Arrowwood viburnum (Viburnum dentatum) grows to 10’
Beach Plum (Prunus maritima) grows to 8’
o I would recommend no pruning in Zone 3 which is entirely within the Coastal Bank resource area.
o Conditions for management of native ground cover within 50’ buffer
Recommend: Continue to October 25, 2022
September 27, 2022 Hearing
Recommend: The applicant has requested to continue the hearing to October 11, 2022 to revise the restoration plan.
Administrative Review
Conservation Commission Meeting - October 11, 2022
September 13, 2022 Hearing
Site Visit: 9.2.2022
Staff Comments:
Follow up to a violation notice issued in April 2021. Maintain vista via pruning after a violation. There is no history
of vegetation management within the 50’ buffer at this property.
Unusual to transplant trees for a vista corridor, has the Commission permitted this in the past?
o The Commission typically allows view corridors, not an expansive vista – like the one that exists now. We
recommend leaving the trees to grow naturally.
Pruning typically only occurs within the vista corridor, since pruning and stump cutting are proposed outside of the
corridor we need to understand what trees will be affected and why (proposal to include photos).
Landscape fabric exists on site, this was not a permitted activity. The Commission should require the landscape
fabric to be removed as it has an adverse impact on the resource areas (prevents vegetation from growing
through it). Should be included in restoration plan, plant shrubs to create a fully vegetated 50’ buffer
In reviewing the view shed in the Pruning Heights Diagram, what happens if/when tree canopies grow into the
bottom of the view shed?
Pruning Zone 3 is entirely within a Coastal Bank, proposed restoration plantings are a beneficial addition
o Will the Commission allow pruning within the Coastal Bank?
This is a complex site due to tree topping occurring for an unknown duration of time. I spoke with Jen Crawford
regarding these questions and comments. Updates to the plan and narrative are anticipated.
Recommend: Continue to September 27, 2022
Figure 1 Unpermitted Tree Topping 4.21.2021 Figure 2 Unpermitted Tree Topping 5.18.2021
September 29th, 2022
Brewster Conservation Commission
1657 Main Street
Brewster, MA 02631
Dear Brewster Conservation Commissioners,
Crawford Land Management (CLM) respectfully submits the attached revised Restoration
Plan for 127 Hillbourne Terrace. These revisions have been made in response to comments
that were received during the public hearing held on 9/13/22.
This revised Restoration Plan reflects a narrower view corridor. With this revised view
corridor, the approximate number of previously pruned seedling or sapling specimens for
removal and re-vegetation with native shrubs has been reduced from 28 to 23. The
specimens for removal are still proposed to be re-vegetated with native shrubs at a 2:1 ratio,
resulting in the planting of 46 native maritime shrubs. This proposed view corridor also
preserves an approximately 50’ wide stretch of undisturbed or restored naturalized
woodland area on either side of the corridor.
Additionally, the revised Restoration Plan specifies how the existing landscape fabric within
the restoration area will be handled. This landscape fabric has been on the property for
some time and has accumulated organic material, including native grasses which have
rooted through the fabric. Any exposed portions of the landscape fabric will be removed by
hand, and where the fabric is overlain by organic material and established grasses it will
remain in place. Bare soils resulting from removal of the landscape fabric will then be
seeded with the native restoration seed mix specified on the Restoration Plan.
Ultimately, the revised view corridor will result in fewer previously pruned specimens being
removed as well as a larger, more contiguous area of undisturbed naturalized area. The
maritime shrubland that is proposed in the restoration area will ultimately enhance the
ecological value of the site by providing an increase in native plant species diversity.
We hope the information in this letter resolves any concerns regarding the proposed project
and that you see the value of the proposed work for improving the overall health and
diversity of the existing naturalized area on site. We have included diagrammatic photos
that visualize the previously proposed view corridor, as well as the revised one to illustrate
the reduction in the scope of the proposed view corridor. If you should have any questions
or require additional information, please contact me at jen@crawfordlm.com.
Respectfully,
Jennifer Crawford, PLA, ASLA
PRESIDENT, CRAWFORD LAND MANAGEMENT
Previously proposed view corridor (per plan dated 8/24/22).
Revised proposed view corridor (per plan dated 9/29/22).
Personal Statement of Heidi Stam, applicant, for request for permit File No. SE 009-1938
127 Hillbourne Terrace
Brewster, MA
Good evening Members of the Conservation Commission. My name is Heidi Stam and I am the property
owner and applicant for the permit at 127 Hillbourne Terrace. I apologize for not being able to attend
the first meeting on Sept. 13 as I was unavoidably out of the country. I have had an opportunity to listen
to the archive of the meeting, however, and I can appreciate the concerns that have been raised, and I
have consulted further with my landscape and ecological restoration expert, Jen Crawford, and with my
civil engineer and surveyor, Craig Ferrari, about appropriate steps to address these concerns.
I believe the discussion showed that the Commission is not fully aware of the history in this case, and I
believe I can shed further light on the current situation. I respectfully submit this statement to the
record because I believe it can assist the Commission in its consideration of the application.
My then husband and I purchased the property in 2010 from the original owner. The house was built
and the land developed in 1994 by the original owner. The original owners were the people who
created the existing conditions. The existing view and the landscape fabric had already been established
when we purchased the home. None of the issues we are discussing today were discussed with us when
we purchased the property and, in fact, we were unaware of them until I received a notice to show
cause in April 2021. Under the circumstances which I will describe below, I believe we had a reasonable
understanding that the current conditions could be appropriately maintained as they had been for the
prior 16 years.
The view corridor is the same today as it was when the house was purchased in 2010. I have the photos
from the real estate company brochure advertising the home for sale. The “expansive” view was touted
in the sales brochure and, of course, the value incorporated into the sales price. I attach photos from
the sales brochure as Exhibit 1 to this statement. The only difference with the current view is that we
lost one pitch pine in a storm (it actually fell on the deck) around 2012 and a second pitch pine was
removed a couple of years ago after authorization from the Conservation Commission upon application
because it was rotting and leaning toward the house.
At the time we purchased the house, were told that “vista pruning” was permissible and we continued
the practice of pruning in accordance with guidance provided by the former owner and his landscaping
company. Unfortunately, and regrettably, we were not aware that a special permit or further
permissions were required. Apparently, the landscape fabric had been laid down when the house was
built. It was not visible at the time of our purchase in 2010 because the area immediately adjacent to
the lawn was thickly covered with mulch. It was not for several years, when the mulch eroded, that I
noticed a few spots of landscape fabric. As time elapsed, it was evident that the prior owners had used
the fabric across the area, but that grasses, moss and saplings were growing through the fabric.
In addition, the settlement of the home purchase was delayed by one week at the request of Brewster
Conservation who came out to inspect the property. Unfortunately, I have no specific information
regarding the decision to allow the settlement to go forward on July 8, 2010. While I now fully
understand that continuing to maintain the property as it had been for the prior 16 years was not
permitted, I also believe that my assessment was reasonable that it was an appropriate and acceptable
approach given the information I had at the time:
1.There was no disclosure by the original owner regarding vista permitting requirements or the
existence of landscape fabric on the property.
2.Brewster Conservation inspected the property prior to settlement and raised no specific
objection to the condition of the property and allowed the sale to go through.
3.Neither the listing agent for the property nor the settlement attorney raised any of these issues
during the sale process.
4.My understanding at the time, now clearly incorrect, was that seasonal vista pruning was
allowed. This understanding was enabled by the original owner and his representatives and
service providers.
5.Further, I always understood that no trees should be removed and as evidence of my good faith
regarding these requirements, I applied for permission to remove the leaning pitch pine.
Under the circumstances, I was extremely upset and distressed to learn through my homewatch
company that a Notice to Show Cause had been issued regarding the property. I immediately contacted
Brewster Conservation and explained my willingness to resolve the matter cooperatively. I had a
number of conversations with Noelle Aguiar regarding how best to move forward to remediate the
situation. Given my clear cooperative intent and actions, Ms. Aguiar determined not to issue an
enforcement order and we proceeded to develop a plan to rectify the situation and obtain a permit. I
attach as Exhibit 2 a series of emails between me and Ms. Aguiar from April 29, 2021 to May 24,, 2021.
She was extremely helpful to me and with her guidance about the process, I engaged experts in
landscape architecture and environmental restoration as well as a civil engineering firm to assist me in
developing a plan and securing a permit. I felt Ms. Aguiar was appreciative of my concern and
cooperation and while I know she did not speak for the Commission, she led me to believe that if I took
these steps “it looks like you will be just fine getting a permit for the vista cutting work you are looking
to set up and maintain.” She even provided me some suggestions as to the type of native species that
could be planted in lieu of the pruned trees. (See Email dated May 24 from Ms. Aguillar).
My intent here is not to add to your workload but to help explain my perspective on the application. It
has been developed with the best of intentions and at considerable expense by experts in landscape and
environmental restoration in an effort to do the right thing by the land, and for the animal habitat, but
also to reasonably preserve the value of my property. I believe I have acted in good faith since I
purchased this property and am doing everything possible to improve the situation. I respectfully
request that you approve my application. Thank you for your consideration.
Respectfully Submitted,
Heidi Stam
1
Andreana Sideris
From:Heidi Stam <heidistam150@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, October 4, 2022 11:44 AM
To:Andreana Sideris
Cc:Jennifer Crawford; Craig Ferrari; Lauren Taylor
Subject:Materials for Hearing on 10/13
Attachments:Personal Statement Brewster Conservation.docx; Hillbourne Ter 1 photos.jpg; Hillbourne
ter 2 photos.jpg; Hillbourne ter 3 photo.jpg; Hillbourne Ter 4 photo.jpg; Hillbourne Ter 5
photos.jpg; Exhibit 2 -- email thread.pdf
Hi Andi -- I hope you are well. I am sorry I was unable to attend the first hearing on the permit application.
I am submitting the attached materials, a personal statement and exhibits, for the record in this matter and for
distribution to the Commissioners for their consideration. Please let me know if you require anything additional.
Thanks very much for your help!
Heidi Stam
EXISTING
DWELLING
LAWN
50' TOB BUFFER
TOP OF C
O
A
S
T
A
L
B
A
N
K
FLOOD ZONE AE (EL 13)
FLOOD ZONE X
FLOOD ZON
E
V
E
(
E
L
1
6
)
FLOOD ZON
E
X
VI
E
W
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
VI
E
W
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
DECK
25
10
4" PR. OAK
4" PR. OAK
4" PR. OAK
5" PR. OAK
4" PR. OAK
8" MULTI-STEM
PR. OAK
4" SERVICEBERRY
4" SERVICEBERRY
14" PR. OAK
8" PR. CHERRY
MULTI-STEM
5" PR. OAK
EDGE OF LAWN
EDGE OF LAWN
15
EXISTING
NATURALIZED
AREA
PRUNING
ZONE 2
PRUNING
ZONE 4
PRUNING
ZONE 3
EXISTING
NATURALIZED
AREA
25
2
5
20
15
10
15
10
PRUNING
ZONE 1
TRANSPLANTED
2" PITCH PINE
TRANSPLANTED
CEDAR SEEDLING
FORSYTHIA
CEDAR SEEDLING;
TRANSPLANT OUT
OF VIEW
CORRIDOR
6 SWEET FERN
4 SWEET FERN 4 VIRGINIA
ROSE
5 VIBURNUM
9 BEACH PLUM
5 WINTERBERRY
5 CHOKEBERRY
EXISTING EDGE
OF VEGETATION
EXISTING EDGE
OF VEGETATION
2" PITCH PINE;
TRANSPLANT
OUT OF VIEW
CORRIDOR
3 WINTERBERRY
EX. AREA OF LANDSCAPE
FABRIC OVERLAIN WITH
ORGANIC MATERIAL AND
GRASSES; LEAVE FABRIC IN
PLACE WHERE NATIVE
GROUNDCOVERS HAVE
ESTABLISHED; REMOVE ANY
EXPOSED PORTIONS OF FABRIC
BY HAND & SEED EXPOSED SOILS
WITH RESTORATION SEED MIX
5 CHOKEBERRY
MULTI-STEM
6" PR. OAK
BORDERING VEGETATED WETLAND
PREVIOUSLY PROPOSED
EXTENTS OF VIEW CORRIDOR
(PLAN DATED 8/24/22)
PRUNE 7-10'PRUNE 10-12'PRUNE 12-18'NO PRUNING
BO
R
D
E
R
I
N
G
V
E
G
E
T
A
T
E
D
W
E
T
L
A
N
D
TO
P
O
F
C
O
A
S
T
A
L
B
A
N
K
VIEW SHED
PRUNING
ZONE 1
PRUNING
ZONE 2
PRUNING
ZONE 3
PRUNING
ZONE 4
SCALE:
DATE:
NO
:
DA
T
E
:
RE
V
I
S
I
O
N
:
BY
:
All rights reserved. The drawings, designs, and
ideas embodied therein are property of CLM
and shall not be copied, reproduced, or
disclosed in connection with any work other
than the project for which they have been
prepared, in whole or part, without prior
written authorization of CLM.
88 Route 6A, Suite 2B | Sandwich, MA 02563
www.crawfordlm.com | 508.477.1346
BR
E
W
S
T
E
R
,
M
A
0
2
6
3
1
12
7
H
I
L
L
B
O
U
R
N
E
T
E
R
R
A
C
E
ST
A
M
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
E
08/24/22
1/8" = 1'-0"
1 of 1
RESTORATION
PLAN
PRUNING HEIGHTS DIAGRAM
RESTORATION PLAN
PLANT SCHEDULE
SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME QTY.SIZE
WOODY SHRUBS
Aronia melanocarpa Black chokeberry 10 #3-#5
Comptonia peregrina Sweet fern 10 #3
Ilex verticillata Winterberry 8 #3-#5
Prunus maritima Beach plum 9 #3-#5
Rosa virginiana Virginia rose 4 #3
Viburnum dentatum Arrowwood viburnum 5 #3-#5
*CLM WILL NOT PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OR
CERTIFICATION FOR ANY WORK COMPLETED BY
OTHERS, NOR DOES CLM TAKE ANY RESPONSIBILITY
FOR WORK COMPLETED BY OTHERS.
N
8 4 0 8 24
8 4 0 8 24
VEGETATION MANAGEMENT:
·Any invasive, non-native or aggressive vegetation
that interferes with restoration activities will be
removed and treated using an appropriate
herbicide (Glyphosate-based or Triclopyr-based)
using a cut and wipe method.
·Vegetation for removal is to be flush cut leaving the
roots in place to maintain soil stability.
·Existing landscape fabric that is exposed will be
removed. Any fabric that is overlain by organic
material and native grasses is to remain.
·Seed any exposed soils resulting from vegetation
removal with the Restoration Seed Mix to establish a
native vegetative groundcover.
MAINTENANCE (3 SEASONS MIN.):
·For any necessary work that needs to be completed
during bird nesting season, a bird monitor report will
be completed and submitted to the Agent for
approval prior to work taking place for the nesting
season.
·Monitor restoration area and perform maintenance
cut and wipe treatments or hand weed invasive,
non-native, aggressive species that have
germinated from existing seed bank, or re-sprouted
from roots after removal. Site will be monitored and
maintained throughout the year for both cool
season and warm season invasive, non-native, and
aggressive species.
RESTORATION PLANTING:
·Plantings to be installed after any removal work has
been completed.
ANNUAL VISTA PRUNING:
·Refer to the Pruning Heights Diagram for
appropriate heights.
·Absolutely no topping of trees. All pruning work shall
adhere to ANSI A300 Pruning Standards.
·All pruning work will be completed or overseen by a
MA certified arborist.
·Pruning work will only be completed during
dormancy (Nov-April).
ONGOING MAINTENANCE:
·Property will remain under active management to
eradicate invasive and aggressive species through
hand weeding and/or cut and wipe herbicide
treatments as necessary.
·Regenerative pruning for lateral growth within the
view corridor will be ongoing.
·Regenerative pruning and stump sprout
management outside the view corridor will be
ongoing as necessary until trees demonstrate an
acceptable form for sustained health.
APPLICATOR & OVERSIGHT NOTES:
·Herbicide application will only be completed by
Massachusetts state-licensed and insured pesticide
applicators knowledgeable with invasive,
non-native, and native plant identification, both
in-leaf and bare-twig.
·All restoration work is overseen by a Certified
Ecological Restoration Practitioner (CERP).
·Field verification of any specimens for removal will
be completed by a MA certified arborist.
·All pruning work will be overseen by a MA certified
arborist.
ANNUAL MONITORING REPORTS:
Submit annual monitoring reports each year for three
years to the Conservation Commission. Annual
monitoring reports should include:
1.Representative project area photographs
2.Project activities completed to-date
3.Anticipated activities to be completed during the
next year
4.Assessment of invasive species management
progress
5.Assessment of restoration planting establishment
6.Recommendations for any changes in land
management techniques necessary to ensure the
success of the project
7.Any unexpected or arbitrary changes to the project
area
RESTORATION AREA WITHIN VIEW CORRIDOR
RESTORATION AREA OUTSIDE VIEW CORRIDOR
·All pruned or topped specimens are to
be assessed by a MA certified arborist.
·Specimens that do not have the
structural framework to be trained for
lateral growth will be flush cut and
treated and replaced with native
shrubs appropriate to the correct
height zone.
·Any pruned or topped specimens to
remain are to be regeneratively
pruned and/or pruned for lateral
growth to maintain the appropriate
height for the pruning zone in which it
is located.
·All pruned or topped specimens are to
be assessed by a MA certified arborist.
·Specimens that are suitable for
continued growth will be regeneratively
pruned to encourage long-term health.
·Specimens that are not likely to respond
well to regenerative pruning will be flush
cut and managed as stump sprouts to a
single-leader tree left to grow to maturity.
EXISTING TREE TO BE TRANSPLANTED
*Based on field observations,
approximately 23 pruned or
topped seedling/sapling
specimens within the view
corridor will need to be removed.
Specimens for removal will be
verified in the field by a MA
certified arborist. Removed
specimens will be replaced at a
2:1 ratio with native shrubs.
RESTORATION NOTES:
DOWN CAPE ENGINEERING, INC.
939 ROUTE 6A, SUITE C
YARMOUTH PORT, MA 02675
SURVEYOR/ENGINEER:
Restoration Seed Mix: Harmony Seed Mix
from Colonial Seed w/ Little Bluestem
(Schizachyrium scoparium) added
1
1
9/
2
9
/
2
2
LT
Ad
d
e
d
n
o
t
e
a
b
o
u
t
l
a
n
d
s
c
a
p
e
f
a
b
r
i
c
r
e
m
o
v
a
l
an
d
n
a
r
r
o
w
e
d
p
r
o
p
o
s
e
d
v
i
e
w
c
o
r
r
i
d
o
r
.
1
1
1
Administrative Review
Conservation Commission Meeting - October 11, 2022
Administrative Report – Neal Shifman and Deborah Rau, 87 North Pond Drive, SE 9-1934
Memo to: Brewster Conservation Commission
From: Chris Miller and Andreana Sideris
RE: Notice of Intent, 87 North Pond Drive, 89/58 (27/84-1)
Notice of Intent
Neal Shifman and Deborah Rau propose to install a seasonal dock, create a vista corridor, remove invasive
species, plant native species and convert a stone patio into a dry-laid paver patio on and within 50 and 100 feet of
inland resources at 87 North Pond Drive, 89/58 (27/84-1).
October 11, 2022 Hearing
Staff Comments:
Revised site plan was submitted to the Commission on October 5, 2022
Report of Survey Findings from Haines Hydrogeological Consulting was submitted to the Commission on
October 5, 2022
On October 6, 2022, John O’Reilly requested for the hearing to be continued to October 25, 2022 to receive
feedback from NHESP regarding the updated site plan.
September 27, 2022 Hearing
9.20.2022 Update – John received notification from NHESP stating that the dock should be relocated.
Awaiting further feedback from NHESP: NHESP has determined that additional information is required, i.e. botanical
surveys for the Two-flowered Rush (Juncus biflorus) and Plymouth Gentian (Sabatia kennedyana).
Recommend: Continue hearing to October 11, 2022
Previous Hearings
Staff Comments:
Wetland line adjusted to match previous delineation
Patio layer adjusted to include A/C area
Mitigation planting area added from previous permit for accuracy – proposed restoration plantings in area
Eliminated – beach work, vegetation remove/replace, view corridor (reduced to selective limbing of two oak trees)
Administrative Review
Conservation Commission Meeting - October 11, 2022
Administrative Report – Sears Point Condominiums, Sears Point Drive, SE 9-1932
Memo to: Brewster Conservation Commission
From: Chris Miller and Andreana Sideris
RE: Notice of Intent, Sears Point Drive 57/3-298,3-299 (4/1-48,1-49)
Resource Areas: Coastal Beach, Coastal Bank, Salt Marsh, Land Containing Shellfish
Notice of Intent
Sears Point Condominium proposes to extend the coir envelope shoreline protection system in addition to sand
nourishment, plantings and the placement of compacted gravel borrow fill within coastal resources at Sears
Point Drive, 57/3-298, 3-299 (4/1-48, 4/1-49).
*Project description has since been modified to propose to construct and enhance shorefront protection
measures including: the construction of a sand-drift fence, modification of coir envelopes, beach nourishment,
the placement of fill to help re-grade the bank and revegetation within coastal resources.
October 11, 2022 Hearing
Staff Comments:
The Draft Orders of Conditions have been completed and sent to the Commission and Representative for review.
Recommend: The Draft Order of Conditions have been sent to the Commission, representative and applicant for review.
If the Commission finds them to be complete and correct, than I recommend approving the Final Order of Conditions.
Previous Hearings
Staff Comments:
The coir roll system is currently in violation of SE 9-1804 as it does not taper from three envelops to one envelope
tall approaching the abutting property line to the west.
Updated Site Plan and Narrative Submitted 8.18.2022.
No sand nourishment (maintenance) has occurred since the coir roll system was put in place
o SE 9-1804 – recommended 81 cubic yards of sand nourishment per year. No sand nourishment has
occurred since the coir roll system was completed in Feb 2021. The Commission can require nourishment
for this year and the previous year. The proposed nourishment is 70 cubic yards.
Sturdy sand drift fencing is too much structure to permit within a dune. Snow fencing could be an alternative.
Updates to the Plan and Narrative:
The 15’ extension to the coir roll system has been removed. Existing coir system ti be modified to taper, as
approved in previous order of conditions SE 9-1804
An additional row of sand drift fence is proposed between the existing sand drift fence and existing coir array
The slope has been decreased from 1.5 to 1.7
o The nourishment will be graded all the way to the newly proposed sand drift fence.
Second Review by Greg Berman (9.16.2022):
Proposed Modifications
The applicant has indicated that previously permitted (and required) nourishment be allowed to be
placed on the western side of the array. Greg states that this activity would be a positive adjustment
as it would reduce end scour and potential damage to the abutting property.
It may also reduce end scour if the western terminus of the coir array is adjusted (i.e., by tapering
elevation and wrapping it into the bank)
An additional row of sand drift fence
Administrative Review
Conservation Commission Meeting - October 11, 2022
Overall, the revisions provided by the applicant would have much less impact on the coastal
resources (the fronting beach, the coastal bank, and the coastal resource areas on the adjacent
property)
First Review by Greg Berman:
Existing conditions
Erosion at the coir/beach interface (not nourished)
Buried drift fence (sand accumulation), potential for snow fencing to enhance
End of the coir roll array does not taper or “return” at an angle back into the coastal bank as required
in permit SE 9-1804 (see below for site plan and conditions)
Vegetation establishing on face of the planted bank
Dune development at base of coastal bank due to mild winters and sand accumulation
Rock Jetty Impacts – recommend notching to allow movement of impounded sand
Noelle’s Comments for First Report
In complete agreement with Greg’s findings noted above
Assessment of proposed fill in coastal bank
o While the material is proposed to match the existing material on-site, the main issue for erosion is the
steepness of the bank and lack of natural slope stabilization (plantings).
o Coastal bank materials do not have a high level of cohesion, they slough and slide down the slope
due to erosion by wind/wave/stormwater flow.
o Areas where coir netting and plantings have been used show clear potential for stabilization with
existing bank material and plantings with no additional materials needed
o Proposal shows the angle of the bank remaining very steep and maintaining the erosion potential
(see below)
o Plan notes 6in to 9in lifts below proposed coastal bank material– more detail?
Assessed Extension of Coir Roll System
Current plan shows no tapering or return to the coastal bank and array ends on the property
boundary with abutter
Erosion clearly evident at the end of the current coir roll system (end scour) and dimishes within the
15 foot setback to the abutting property boundary (contained within the same property) – requirement
Administrative Review
Conservation Commission Meeting - October 11, 2022
of permit SE 9-1804 to remove potential impact to abutting property from installation of coir roll
system
Coir roll systems can create negative side effect for resource areas and abutting properties –
exacerbating beach erosion, damaging neighboring properties, impacting marine habitats, diminishing
ability of coastal landforms (coastal bank) from providing protection from storm damage
Erosion from coir envelopes should be contained within the applicant’s property
Current coir roll system likely making erosion worse as not properly tapered or nourished
Assessed placement of coastal bank fill
Site plan notes that “fill material brought to the site shall be compatible with existing grain size
distribution where it is placed (coastal bank nourishment will match sieve analysis of coastal bank
materials and coastal beach nourishment will match sieve analysis of beach materials). Should not
act as hardening.
Assessed risk to property
Pre-1978 structure is 75ft from the top of the coastal bank
Existing bulkhead/revetment/coir system covers 105ft to the corner of the building
Other buildings are more that 100 feet inland and in no immediate danger
Only land at risk for erosion is lawn
PREVIOUS COMMENTS
From Previous Meeting:
1. Previous Orders of Conditions required the coir roll system to taper down and terminate 15 feet before
the property bouddary with BCT:
Based on advice of coastal expert Greg Berman and consultant Matthew Creighton of BSC Group due to the erosive
impacts of end scour. In visiting the site, there is significantly more erosion at the end of the coir roll system then on the
coir roll system (why the system is being proposed to expand) – translating this erosive reality to another property does
not meet the variance requirement:
2. Translating erosion potential to another property can possibly injure private property (abutting BCT
property) which is not allowed per the State Wetlands Protection Act:
“(i) An Order of Conditions does not grant any property rights or any exclusive privileges;
it does not authorize any injury to private property or invasion of property rights.”
3. Orders of Conditions SE 9-1804:
Administrative Review
Conservation Commission Meeting - October 11, 2022
A49. The coir envelopes shall taper from three envelopes to one envelope tall approaching the abutting property line to
the west. The coir roll system shall terminate 15 feet from the abutting property boundary west of the shoreline system.
**The coir roll system is currently in violation as it does not taper from three envelops to one envelope tall approaching the
abutting property line to the west.**
Construction completed – 2.3.21
No sand nourishment activities or additional planting have been completed
Order of Conditions and Site Plan, SE 9-1804
Administrative Review
Conservation Commission Meeting - October 11, 2022
Directions from Greg Berman:
As long as the compensatory nourishment is placed such that the short term (2-5 year) average is at least 81 cubic yards per
year it should suffice to compensate for the reduction of sediment supply. However, interaction of waves on an exposed rock
revetment (or even coir envelopes) may lead to enhanced erosion on BCT property. The sand volume between the drift fence
and revetment/coir will mitigate this, but this volume must be maintained. If this buffing sand drops below a certain level it
could be the trigger for additional sand placement, as part of (or in addition to) an annual nourishment amount. A potential
trigger for nourishment might be if the rocks are exposed or if the sand drift fence is sticking out more than the 6” indicated
in the plans.
Directions from Consultant, Matthew Creighton of BSC Group
Matthew Creighton, PWS, MVP Coastal Scientist, BSC Group
“BSC suggests the applicant add a beach nourishment component to the project showing a proposed beach nourishment area
seaward of the bank that can be nourished annually, when needed. If this project results in a loss of beach elevation, beach
nourishment should be required by the Commission to maintain the stability, form, and function of the beach as required in
state Wetlands Act.
BSC recommends a 15-foot buffer to the property line and a return installed on the coir envelopes to reduce end scour.
Another option could include tapering the envelopes toward the property line down from 3 envelops tall to 1 envelop tall
ending 15 feet off the property line. Again, this will help reduce potential impacts to the abutting property.
Administrative Review
Conservation Commission Meeting - October 11, 2022
1 | P a g e
COASTAL PROCESSES SPECIALIST
WOODS HOLE SEA GRANT | CAPE COD COOPERATIVE EXTENSION
gberman@whoi.edu | gberman@barnstablecounty.org
508-289-3046 | 193 Oyster Pond Road, MS #2, Woods Hole, MA 02543-1525
September 16, 2022
TO: Brewster Conservation Commission
CC: Catherine Ricks & Don Monroe (Coastal Engineering Co. Inc.)
FROM: Greg Berman, Coastal Processes Specialist (WHSG & CCCE)
RE: Supplemental to 8/3/2022 report
This memo is supplemental to the 8/3/2022 report from the Coastal Processes Specialist that focused on
the property of, and land immediately surrounding, 40 and 21 Wheeler Drive (aka Sears Point) in
Brewster. For the 8/3/2022 report, the Coastal Processes Specialist reviewed a Notice of Intent (NOI –
dated 06/09/2022) and Site Plans (dated 06/07/2022) that were submitted by the applicant’s
consultant, Coastal Engineering Co. Inc. The applicant has since filed a Project Narrative Addendum
(dated 8/18/2022) and revised Site plans (dated 8/16/2022). The Brewster Conservation Commission
requested this supplemental independent review to reexamine the site based on the updated plan and
narrative.
The applicant’s site plans (6/7/22 and 8/16/22) were compared (see figures 1 and 2). The primary
differences between these plans are that the 15’ of coir array extension (to the property line) has been
removed and an additional row of sand drift fence is proposed between the existing sand drift fence and
existing coir array. This cross-section shows the gentler slope as the nourishment will be graded all the
way to the newly proposed sand drift fence. There was also some rock seaward of the existing drift
fence on the 6/7/22 plans that is not present on the 8/16/22 plans.
The applicant has also indicated that previously permitted (and required) nourishment be allowed to be
placed on the western side of the array. This is a positive adjustment as it would reduce end scour and
potential damage to the abutting property. If the western terminus of the coir array is adjusted (i.e., by
tapering elevation and wrapping it into the bank), this might also help reduce the end scour.
Overall, the revisions provided by the applicant would have much less impact on the fronting beach, the
coastal bank, and the coastal resource areas on the adjacent property.
2 | P a g e
Figure 1. The grayscale images have been extracted from the applicant’s site plans and placed next to each other for the sake of easy
comparison. The dates in red have been added and correspond to the date of the site plan. The primary differences between these plans are
that the 15’ of coir array extension (to the property line) has been removed and an additional row of sand drift fence is proposed between the
existing sand drift fence and existing coir array.
08-16-202206-07-2022
3 | P a g e
Figure 2. The grayscale images have been extracted from the applicant’s site plans and placed next to each other for the sake of easy
comparison. The dates in red have been added and correspond to the date of the site plan. The primary differences between these plans area
that the 15’ of coir array extension (to the property line) has been removed and an additional row of sand drift fence is proposed between the
existing sand drift fence and existing coir array. This cross-section shows the more gentle slope as the nourishment will be graded all the way to
the newly proposed sand drift fence. There was also some rock seaward of the existing drift fence on the 6/7/22 plans that is not present on the
8/16/22 plans.
08-16-202206-07-2022
NOTE: If enclosures are not as noted, please contact us at (508) 255-6511
TRANSMITTAL
To:
Brewster Conservation Commission
Attn: Noelle Aguiar, Agent
1657 Main Street
Brewster, MA 02631
Date: 8/18/2022 Project No. C13697.02
Via: 1st Class Mail Pick up Delivery Fed Ex
Phone:
Fax:
Subject: Notice of Intent – Revised Plans & Narrative
Proposed Shorefront Protection
Sears Point Condominium Association
Sears Point Drive
Brewster, MA
Map 57 Parcel 3
DEP File No: SE 9-1932
No. of pages to follow:
Plans Copy of Letter Specifications Other
We are sending the following items:
Copies Date No. Description
10 REV 8/18/2022 Revised Project Narrative
10 REV 08/16/2022 C-101, C-102,
C-301
Coastal Engineering Co., Inc., Revised Plan Showing Proposed Shorefront
Protection
These are transmitted as checked below:
for approval for your use as requested for review & comment
Remarks:
Enclosed please find copies of the revised project narrative and revised plans for the above referenced
project.
If you have any questions, please contact our office.
cc: Mass. DEP/SERO – Wetlands
Sears Point Condominium Association
Donald K. Munroe, Project Manager
By: Carla Davis
D:\DOC\C13600\13697\13697.02\Permitting\NOI 2022-Shorefront Protection-Sears Pt\Rev Narrative & Plans 8-18-2022\Transmittal Template.doc
Sears Point Condominium Association - Sears Point Drive – Notice of Intent
C13697.02 A - 1
Project Narrative Addendum
August 18, 2022
1.0. Introduction
The subject property is located at 40 and 21 Wheeler Drive in Brewster. The property is bounded
by Cape Cod Bay to the North, to the east by a condominium neighborhood, and to the west by
Brewster Conservation Trust Lands. In 2017 a coir envelope and coastal bank restoration system
was permitted at the property. After an on-site review of the project with the Conservation agent
and Greg Berman, the applicant is proposing a revision to the project. The applicant is now applying
for a permit to add an additional sturdy sand drift fence between the toe of the existing coir
envelopes and the existing sturdy sand drift fence. The proposed sturdy sand drift fence would
run parallel to the existing sand drift fence and run to the western property line. In addition, the
applicant is seeking to be allowed to place grain size compatible beach nourishment from the
previous permitted beach nourishment but to be concentrated more to the west to protect the
property from end scour and reducing or eliminating any adverse impact on the abutting property.
Upon completion the contractor will restore the access to preconstruction contours and revegetate
the coastal bank.
The project goals are to slow the shoreline erosion and protect and stabilize the upper portion of
the coastal bank.
1.1. Updated Project Description
Sand Drift Fence:
The proposed project currently has 38± feet of coir envelope along the western portion of the toe
of the coastal bank with a sturdy sand drift fence seaward of the coir envelopes. The revised
proposed project would add a second sturdy sand drift fence in between the existing sand drift
fence and the of the coir envelopes. The proposed second sand drift fence would run parallel to
the existing drift fence to the property line to the west.
Construction Access:
Construction access to the site will be via the open grass area to the western side of the Wheeler
House on the property with access to the toe from traversing down the bank along the portion to
be reconstructed. This access has been used for past projects as well. The staging area for
materials and equipment will be in the applicant’s driveway, outside of the resource area.
1.2. Permit History
Unchanged from previous.
Sears Point Condominium Association - Sears Point Drive – Notice of Intent
C13697.02 A - 2
1.3. Performance Standards
State Wetlands Protection Act 310 CMR 10.00
10.04: Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage means land subject to any inundation caused by coastal
storms up to and including that caused by the 100-year storm, surge of record or storm of record,
whichever is greater
The Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage (LSCSF) does not have regulation performance
standards, though it is a protected resource area and therefore approval is needed to perform work
within the LSCSF. This project will not adversely affect LSCSF, it will improve its functionality.
10.27: Coastal Beaches means unconsolidated sediment subject to wave, tidal and coastal storm action
which forms the gently sloping shore of a body of salt water and includes tidal flats. Coastal beaches
extend from the mean low water line landward to the dune line, coastal bankline or the seaward edge of
existing human-made structures, when these structures replace one of the above lines, whichever is
closest to the ocean.
The proposed project is a revision to the previous application and essentially the performance
standards are similar. The project is now reduced in scope to a sturdy sand drift fence that will
act as a soft engineering solution, therefore, erosion would be able to continue for sediment to be
available to the coastal beach. For this reason, the proposed project will not change the size and
form of the coastal beach. The volume of the coastal beach would be augmented with sand
nourishment of a similar grain size to the natural sediment. The sand nourishment is to be placed
at the toe of the bank and graded to a slope matching the existing grades. The ability to respond
to wave action will continue similar to the current conditions. The distribution of sediment grain
size will remain unchanged as the material will be grain size compatible with the existing Coastal
Beach sediment. The water circulation will remain unchanged as there is no proposed change in
the shape of the beach. The water quality will be unaffected by the proposed project. All ground
components of the project are all-natural and/or biodegradable. There would be a temporary short-
term effect to the coastal beach during construction, but there is no anticipated adverse effect to
the coastal beach. The increase in volume of the coastal beach due to nourishment will not increase
erosion, it will provide sediment required for longshore transport through natural processes without
detrimental effects to the coastal bank. The proposed project will allow the coastal beach to
respond to wave action by decreasing the wave energy which help protect the toe of the coastal
bank. The proposed project does not include groins, jetties, solid piers, or other such solid fill
structures. The proposal includes a redistribution of previously approved beach nourishment to be
concentrated to the west to address end scour. The beach nourishment material will be clean
sediment of a grain size compatible with that on the existing Coastal Beach. The proposed project
is located along the Coastal Beach above the mean high-water elevation and is not located within
the tidal flats. Therefore, the proposed project will have no impacts to the tidal flats. According to
Mass Mapper GIS, the proposed project is not located within a NHESP designated area for specified
habitat sites of rare vertebrate or invertebrate species.
Sears Point Condominium Association - Sears Point Drive – Notice of Intent
C13697.02 A - 3
10.30: Coastal Banks means the seaward face or side of any elevated landform, other than a coastal
dune, which lies at the landward edge of a coastal beach, land subject to tidal action, or other wetland.
No coastal engineering structures are proposed. The proposed sand drift fence is considered a
“soft” engineering solution. No new building is proposed. The proposed sand drift fence is designed
to allow waves to pass through but reduce wave energies of the smaller winter storms that do no
tovertop the fence. The fence has the ability to trap windblown sand typically in the milder summer
months and build the beach and dune at the toe of the bank. Upon completion of the project the
coastal bank will be revegetated to stabilize the upper portions of the coastal bank. According to
MA GIS programming, the proposed project is not located within a NHESP designated area for
specified habitat sites of rare vertebrate or invertebrate species.
1.3 Other Protected Resource Areas (Unchanged From original filing)
Other resource areas protected under regulations include FEMA and the Coastal Barrier Resource
System (CBRS), Natural Heritage Endangered Species Program (NHESP), Area of Critical
Environmental Concern (ACEC), Shellfish, and Outstanding Resource Waters (ORW). The proposed
project does not fall within ORW, CBRS, ACEC, NHESP, or shellfish habitat areas.
FEMA
The proposed project is located withing the FEMA VE (EL 15) zone as shown on Firm Panel
C25003C0414J.
Sears Point Condominium Association - Sears Point Drive – Notice of Intent
C13697.02 A - 4
NHESP
MassMapper Delineated NHESP Priority and Estimated Habitat Areas
The proposed project is not within a designated NHESP area.
1.4 Alternative Analysis (Added Alternative 4A)
Alternative 1: Do Nothing
Due to the increase in frequency and intensity of storm events, if nothing were done, the beach
would continue to erode at an expeditious rate further de-stabilizing the Coastal Bank. This de-
stabilization would cause damaged vegetation and other debris to enter the waterbody and resource
areas including the coastal bank, coastal beach, land subject to coastal storm flowage, land under
the ocean and land containing shellfish. If continued erosion is allowed to take place the coastal
bank and vegetation would be at risk of collapse and could enter the waterbody and negatively
affect the resource areas at down shore locations.
Alternative 2 – Beach Nourishment
Beach nourishment could be placed near the toe of the existing coastal bank. The nourishment
would be compatible with the existing sediment that exists at the Coastal Beach. The nourishment
would be constructed as a sacrificial berm. However, the beach nourishment would continue to
erode in the same manner as is currently happening at the project location. Once the beach
nourishment is eroded from the area, the incoming waves would eventually impact the coastal bank
causing further coastal bank erosion, and loss of vegetation similar to alternative 1.
Sears Point Condominium Association - Sears Point Drive – Notice of Intent
C13697.02 A - 5
Alternative 3 – Coir Envelopes
A coir envelope array could be installed at the site similar to the adjacent array of coir envelopes.
The coir envelopes would be anchored to the toe of the bank and be covered with coastal bank
nourishment and planted with native species. The array would hold the toe of the coastal bank slope
while the native vegetation establishes a dense root system to help protect from further erosion.
The coir envelopes provide protection at the toe of the bank but do not address the depletion of
sediment from the beach. This is not the preferred alternative at this time due to the potential
impact to the abutting property that does not have any proposed bank restoration or stabilization
proposed.
Alternative 4 – Coir Envelopes, Beach and Bank Nourishment and Native Plantings
As in Alternative 3, the coir envelope array would be installed on the coastal bank similar to the
adjacent coir envelope array. The coir envelope array would be anchored and covered with bank
compatible material and planted with native plant species. The coir envelope array would stabilize
the toe of the coastal bank to allow for the proposed native plantings to establish dense root
systems to help protect the coastal bank from further episodic erosion. The beach nourishment
would allow for waves to break more seaward than the current conditions adding an additional
element of protection so the coastal bank planting can establish dense root systems. This will
stabilize the top of the bank and decrease the risk of failure which would cause the scarped area to
enter the waterbody. This is not the proposed project based on potential adverse impact to the
abutting property.
Alternative 5 – Sturdy Sand Drift Fence with Beach Nourishment
Alternative 5 includes adding a second row of sturdy drift fence and placing beach nourishment
within the drift fence area as well as Coastal Bank nourishment and vegetation. A second sturdy
sand drift fence placed as shown on the revised plan will give added protection to the existing coir
envelopes as well as trap additional windblown sand in an effort to build up the beach elevation and
potentially create a dune at the toe of the Coastal Bank, adding protection to the Coastal Bank.
Alternative 5 is the revised proposed alternative based on the potential reduction in adverse impact
to the abutting property.
1.5 Construction Protocol
Prior to start of construction:
Prior to the start of any work there will be an on-site meeting to review the order of conditions and
to satisfy the Conservation Agent that the work will be done as specified. The construction start
date to occur upon completion of all pre-construction requirements outlined in the specifications
and Order of Conditions, as well as any pre-construction requirements outlined during the pre-
construction meeting.
Sears Point Condominium Association - Sears Point Drive – Notice of Intent
C13697.02 A - 6
On-site meeting:
Prior to start of construction a meeting will occur to discuss access and means of construction with
the following individuals represented:
Construction Contractor
Coastal Engineering Co. Engineers
Brewster Conservation Commission Representative
To be discussed during this meeting:
Existing conditions, necessary precautions to be taken by the Contractor;
Necessary post-construction reparations and conditions;
Procedure for post-construction inspection;
Pre-construction requirements to be met by contractor:
Proof and Certification of Insurance Coverage
Waiver, Release and Indemnification
Posting of DEP sign
Coordination, as necessary, with the Brewster Police Department and Department of Natural
Resources
Issuance of Construction Permit by Brewster Commission Agent
Pre-construction requirements to be met by owner:
Pre-construction photographs of the access and staging area, access route, and project locus.
Access and staging areas:
The staging area will be at the top of the bank in the open grass area. Access will be down the bank
from the recently constructed area.
Staging area for materials and equipment to be in applicant’s driveway and out of the resource area.
When machinery is not in use, it will be stored in the staging area.
Equipment on beach:
During the course of construction, the following equipment is anticipated on the bank:
An excavator for installing coir envelopes.
A skid-steer to transport materials and placement of beach and bank nourishment.
Miscellaneous hand tools.
Work Completion:
Upon completion of the repair efforts, the upper coastal bank area is to be re-contoured as outlined
on the plan. All disturbed surfaces to be re-contoured, ready for re-vegetation to be performed as
soon as the weather allows.
The Contractor is to notify the Engineer for a meeting with the parties taking part in the
pre-construction meeting, prior to removal of equipment. Deficiencies will be identified to the
Contractor on re-contouring requirements, and road conditions, which will be performed under the
direction of the Engineer.
Sears Point Condominium Association - Sears Point Drive – Notice of Intent
C13697.02 A - 7
Vegetation protocol:
Upon completion of the construction effort, and as soon as weather permits to meet the first growing
season, disturbed areas, such as the re-graded area of coastal bank, are to be re-vegetated.
Post-construction photographs:
The Owner shall supply the Conservation Commission with post-construction photographs of the
access and staging area, access route, and the project locus, as well as the final vegetation
plantings.
1.6 Summary and Recommendations
The proposed project is to install an additional sturdy sand drift fence as described above, a
redistribution of previously permitted beach nourishment and revegetation of the coastal bank upon
completion of the project. These efforts will help protect the resource areas while providing added
protection to the dwellings at the top of the coastal bank.
F:
\
S
D
S
K
P
R
O
J
\
C
1
3
0
0
0
\
C
1
3
6
9
7
\
C
1
3
6
9
7
-
0
2
\
C
1
3
6
9
7
.
0
2
-
C
-
M
A
R
.
d
w
g
A
u
g
1
8
,
2
0
2
2
-
7
:
0
7
a
m
Co
a
s
t
a
l
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
C
o
.
,
I
n
c
.
c
2
0
2
2
PROJECT NO.
OF SHEETS
DRAWN BY
DRAWING FILE
CHECKED BY
DATE
PR
O
J
E
C
T
SCALE
SH
E
E
T
T
I
T
L
E
SEAL
DA
T
E
NO
.
RE
V
I
S
I
O
N
BY
SE
A
R
S
P
O
I
N
T
C
O
N
D
O
M
I
N
I
U
M
A
S
S
O
C
I
A
T
I
O
N
SE
A
R
S
P
O
I
N
T
D
R
I
V
E
BR
E
W
S
T
E
R
,
M
A
C13697.02
PL
A
N
S
H
O
W
I
N
G
SH
O
R
E
F
R
O
N
T
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
O
N
1 3
AS NOTED
06-07-2022
C13697.02-C-MAR.dwg
MJT
1
08
-
1
6
-
2
0
2
2
RE
M
O
V
E
D
C
O
I
R
E
N
V
E
L
O
P
E
E
X
.
A
D
D
E
D
D
R
I
F
T
F
E
N
C
E
MJ
T
SCALE: 1" = 4'
N.A.V.D. 1988 DATUM PROFILE
REF: NOAA VDATUM 06-24-2021
REF: BUZZARDS BAY NATIONAL ESTUARY PROGRAM
VERTICAL DATUM IN U.S. SURVEY FEET REFERENCED
TO THE NORTH AMERICAN VERTICAL DATUM OF 1988
(NAVD88) BASED UPON THE HEXAGON SMARTNET
RTK NETWORK.
EXISTING
66' PROP
O
S
E
D
DRIFT FE
N
C
E
F:
\
S
D
S
K
P
R
O
J
\
C
1
3
0
0
0
\
C
1
3
6
9
7
\
C
1
3
6
9
7
-
0
2
\
C
1
3
6
9
7
.
0
2
-
C
-
M
A
R
.
d
w
g
A
u
g
1
8
,
2
0
2
2
-
7
:
0
7
a
m
Co
a
s
t
a
l
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
C
o
.
,
I
n
c
.
c
2
0
2
2
PROJECT NO.
OF SHEETS
DRAWN BY
DRAWING FILE
CHECKED BY
DATE
PR
O
J
E
C
T
SCALE
SH
E
E
T
T
I
T
L
E
SEAL
DA
T
E
NO
.
RE
V
I
S
I
O
N
BY
SE
A
R
S
P
O
I
N
T
C
O
N
D
O
M
I
N
I
U
M
A
S
S
O
C
I
A
T
I
O
N
SE
A
R
S
P
O
I
N
T
D
R
I
V
E
BR
E
W
S
T
E
R
,
M
A
C13697.02
PL
A
N
S
H
O
W
I
N
G
SH
O
R
E
F
R
O
N
T
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
O
N
2 3
AS NOTED
06-07-2022
C13697.02-C-MAR.dwg
MJT
1
08
-
1
6
-
2
0
2
2
RE
M
O
V
E
D
C
O
I
R
E
N
V
E
L
O
P
E
E
X
.
A
D
D
E
D
D
R
I
F
T
F
E
N
C
E
MJ
T
GENERAL NOTES:
1.THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN THE TOWN OF BREWSTER, MA ALONG CAPE COD BAY AND IS REFERENCED BY:
ACCESSORS MAP: 57 PARCEL 3
2.FLOOD ZONE: THE PROPERTY AND PROPOSED WORK IS LOCATED IN FLOOD ZONES AS INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS. ALL FLOOD
ELEVATIONS ARE REFERENCED TO NAVD 1988 (MSL) FLOOD ZONE VE (EL. 15) AND ZONE X SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING ARE A DIRECT
REPRESENTATION OF THE GRAPHIC FLOOD ZONE BOUNDARIES SHOWN ON THE FEMA FIRM PANEL:
FIRM PANEL: #25001C0414J, EFFECTIVE JULY 16, 2014
3.SUPPLY ALL MATERIAL, EQUIPMENT AND LABOR FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROPOSED SITE IMPROVEMENTS AS DESCRIBED AND SHOWN
ON THE PLAN AND DETAILS.
4.ACCESS FOR MATERIAL AND EQUIPMENT TO BE FROM UPLAND ON THE PROPERTY AS APPROVED. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR
OBTAINING ALL PERMISSION REQUIRED FOR USE OF ANY AND ALL ACCESS.
5.STAGING AREA FOR MATERIALS TO BE ABOVE THE MEAN HIGH WATER ELEVATION. STAGING AREA FOR EQUIPMENT TO BE ON THE
PROPERTY AS APPROVED. WHEN MACHINERY AND EQUIPMENT ARE NOT IN USE, THEY SHALL BE KEPT IN THE STAGING AREA.
6.PERFORMANCE OF THE WORK SHALL BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE PLAN, DETAILS, AND ORDER OF CONDITIONS ISSUED BY THE
BREWSTER CONSERVATION COMMISSION FOR THE REFERENCED PROJECT AND AS DESCRIBED BELOW.
7.ANY FUTURE MAINTENANCE REQUIRED ON THE SHOREFRONT PROTECTION SYSTEM SHALL NOT COMMENCE UNTIL THE BREWSTER
CONSERVATION AGENT HAS FIRST BEEN NOTIFIED AS TO THE SCOPE OF THE REPAIRS.
8.ALL DIMENSIONS, GRADES, ETC. SHOWN ON THIS PLAN SHALL BE FIELD VERIFIED BY THE CONTRACTOR AND ANY DISCREPANCIES
BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ENGINEER TO BE RESOLVED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
9.FILL MATERIAL BROUGHT TO THE SITE SHALL BE COMPATIBLE TO THE EXISTING GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION TO WHERE IT IS PLACED. BANK
NOURISHMENT SHALL BE COMPATIBLE TO THE EXISTING COASTAL BANK GRAIN SIZE AND NOURISHMENT OVER AND IN THE COIR
ENVELOPES SHALL BE COMPATIBLE TO THE EXISTING COASTAL BEACH.
10.ABUTTERS NAMES SHOWN HEREON REFERENCE THE CURRENT TOWN OF BREWSTER ASSESSORS RECORDS.
11.SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR COASTAL CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOUND IN THE "COASTAL
CONSTRUCTION MANUAL" AS PUBLISHED BY THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA-55).MA
12.FORMAL AGREEMENT AS ESTABLISHED BETWEEN BREWSTER CONSERVATION TRUST AND SEARS POINT CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION
RELATED TO PROPOSED WORK ON ASSESSORS MAP 49 PARCEL 135.
COIR ENVELOPES:
1.PROPOSED COIR ENVELOPE SYSTEM TO BE CONSTRUCTED WITH AN INNER LAYER OF JUTE, DOUBLE LAYER OF COIR, AN ADDITIONAL
LAYER OF JUTE AND OUTER LAYER OF COIR. CROSS-SECTION DETAIL LOCATED ON SHEET 3 OF THIS PLAN SET. CHANGE IN
CROSS-SECTION DESIGN OF COIR ENVELOPE TO BE APPROVED BY ENGINEER. COIR ENVELOPE TO BE FILLED WITH SEDIMENT THAT IS
GRAIN-SIZE COMPATIBLE WITH THE COASTAL BEACH (SEE NOTE 9).
MITIGATION NOTES:
1.ALL EXISTING VEGETATED AREAS THAT ARE DISTURBED DURING CONSTRUCTION WILL BE PLANTED WITH NATIVE VEGETATION IN THE
FIRST FULL GROWING SEASON AFTER CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETE.
2.THE COASTAL BANK AND AREAS DELINEATED FOR MITIGATION APPROVED UNDER THE SAME ORDER OF CONDITIONS AS THIS PLAN SHALL
BE PLANTED DURING THE FIRST FULL GROWING SEASON AFTER CONSTRUCTION IS COMPLETE.
PROPOSED
NOTE: LAYERS SHOWN ARE INDIVIDUAL AND TO BE SEWN ON
SITE. LAYERS TO BE AS SHOWN OR AS APPROVED BY ENGINEER.
F:
\
S
D
S
K
P
R
O
J
\
C
1
3
0
0
0
\
C
1
3
6
9
7
\
C
1
3
6
9
7
-
0
2
\
C
1
3
6
9
7
.
0
2
-
C
-
M
A
R
.
d
w
g
A
u
g
1
8
,
2
0
2
2
-
7
:
0
7
a
m
Co
a
s
t
a
l
E
n
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
C
o
.
,
I
n
c
.
c
2
0
2
2
PROJECT NO.
OF SHEETS
DRAWN BY
DRAWING FILE
CHECKED BY
DATE
PR
O
J
E
C
T
SCALE
SH
E
E
T
T
I
T
L
E
SEAL
DA
T
E
NO
.
RE
V
I
S
I
O
N
BY
SE
A
R
S
P
O
I
N
T
C
O
N
D
O
M
I
N
I
U
M
A
S
S
O
C
I
A
T
I
O
N
SE
A
R
S
P
O
I
N
T
D
R
I
V
E
BR
E
W
S
T
E
R
,
M
A
C13697.02
PL
A
N
S
H
O
W
I
N
G
SH
O
R
E
F
R
O
N
T
P
R
O
T
E
C
T
I
O
N
3 3
AS NOTED
06-07-2022
C13697.02-C-MAR.dwg
MJT
1
08
-
1
6
-
2
0
2
2
RE
M
O
V
E
D
C
O
I
R
E
N
V
E
L
O
P
E
E
X
.
A
D
D
E
D
D
R
I
F
T
F
E
N
C
E
MJ
T
SECTION BSECTION A
BENCHED SLOPE FILL TYP.
SCALE: NTS
COIR ENVELOPE DETAIL
SCALE: NTS
DRIFT FENCE DETAIL
SCALE: NTS
Administrative Review
Conservation Commission Meeting - October 11, 2022
Administrative Report – 19 Muskrat Lane LLC c/o Walter Harris, 19 Muskrat Lane
Memo to: Brewster Conservation Commission
From: Chris Miller and Andreana Sideris
RE: Show Cause Hearing, 19 Muskrat Lane, 103/9 (9/3)
Resource Areas: Coastal Beach, Coastal Dune, Bordering Vegetated Wetland
Show Cause Hearing
19 Muskrat Lane LLC, c/o Walter Harris, 19 Muskrat Lane 103/9 (9/3), cutting and clearing of vegetation on and
within 50 feet of wetlands without a valid permit.
October 11, 2022 Hearing
Staff Comments:
Coastal Engineering has been engaged in filing an After-the-fact NOI.
On October 6, 2022, the Conservation Commission received a letter from Coastal Engineering requesting to
extend the filing deadline to November 3, 2022.
September 27, 2022 Hearing
Staff Comments:
At the September 13, 2022 Commission meeting, Benjamin Zehnder had requested a continuance to October 11,
2022 to engage an engineer.
September 13, 2022 Hearing
Enforcement Order Ratified by the Commission
Staff Comments:
Site visit completed 8.16 after multiple reports of landscaping company cutting, clearing, and digging up
vegetation within coastal resource areas and 50’ buffer
Recommend: Amend the Order of Conditions, SE 9-1895. Require a narrative and mitigation planting plan. NHESP
requires a copy of the Request to Amended OOC with a restoration plan, so they can provide comments relative to
state-listed species.
October 6, 2022 C18861.01
Brewster Conservation Commission Via Email
Attn: Andreana Sideris
Brewster Town Hall
1657 Main St
Brewster, MA 02631
Re: Request for NOI Filing Extension
Proposed Dune Restoration
19 Muskrat Lane LLC
19 Muskrat Lane, Brewster
Map 103 Parcel 9
Dear Ms. Sideris and Commission Members:
On behalf of our client, 19 Muskrat Lane LLC, we would like to request an (After the fact) Notice of Intent
filing extension, as a follow-up to the previously discussed enforcement matter.
The extension will allow additional time for preparation of site and restoration plans.
Therefore, we respectfully request that you extend the filing deadline to November 3, 2022.
If you have any questions, please call our office.
Sincerely,
COASTAL ENGINEERING CO., INC.
Carla Davis
Enclosures: As Stated
cc: 19 Muskrat Lane, LLC
Rubin and Rudman, LLP
Benjamin E. Zehnder, LLC
Donald K. Munroe, Project Manager
Administrative Review
Conservation Commission Meeting - October 11, 2022
Administrative Report – Stephan Brown, 2628 Main Street
Memo to: Brewster Conservation Commission
From: Chris Miller and Andreana Sideris
RE: Show Cause Hearing, 2628 Main Street 78/14 (15/113-2)
Show Cause Hearing
Brown, 2628 Main Street, 78/14 (15/113-2) Cutting and Clearing of vegetation within 25 feet of inland wetlands
October 11, 2022 Hearing
Staff Comments:
The Commission received additional documents, including a product report and various draft maps for showing
zones of the property
A Notice of Intent was not filed on the October 6, 2022 filing deadline
September 27, 2022 Hearing
Staff Comments:
New draft information submitted for discussion at meeting.
Recommend: Continue hearing to October 11, 2022
From Previous Meetings
New site plan submitted showing shed with decks and loam pile.
Last new plans: Delineation Plan and Restoration Plan
Restoration Plan Submitted
Plantings:
o Shrub plantings in Bordering Vegetated Wetland – American elderberry (35), black chokeberry (9), highbush
blueberry (35), inkberry (9), sweet pepperbush (9)
o Shrub plantings in the Buffer Zone – bay berry (4), spicebush (4), witch hazel (4)
o Wetland and buffer zone seed mixes
Inland Bank alterations:
o Re-shaping inland bank by excavating/pulling back sedimen to create gentler slope for stabilization
o Coir logs along edge of the waterway to stabilize edges
To Qualify for Agricultural Exemption, Land Must be in Agricultural Use:
Land must be presently and primarily used in a manner related to, and customarily and necessarily used in
producing agricultural commodities.
Land must be used in producing or raising agricultural commodities for commercial purposes
Commercial purpose = the activity of selling of goods + goal/expectation of making a profit
Land must be actively used for the above within the last 5 years.
To Provide Proof of Agriculture – documentation of the extent and timing of agricultural use
Aerial photography, USDA Farm Plan, receipts of sale, ASCS cropping records, etc.
Activities Must be Normal Maintenance or Improvement
Practice must be fit to the scale and scope of the operation
Must be necessary and directly related to the production or raising of agricultural commodities
Must be undertaken in a manner as to prevent erosion and siltation of adjacent waterbodies and wetlands
A field edge must already be existing - the land it encircles must be in production
Administrative Review
Conservation Commission Meeting - October 11, 2022
Activities Not Exempt –
The management of any field edge that falls within a Bordering Vegetated Wetland
is not intended to allow the conversion of Bordering Vegetated Wetland into cropland
the cutting or removal of trees and understory vegetation shall not occur within 25 feet of the bank of a water body
that is not managed within the land in production
no tilling, filling, excavation, or other change in the existing topography shall occur within the field edge
September 6th, 2022
Brewster Conservation Commission
Notice Of Intent: Narrative Draft
Stephen Brown
2620 to 2628 Main Street
Brewster Ma, 02631
Draft Notice of Intent which we intend to file before September 22, for the October 11th Hearing. We
would appreciate constructive criticism
Dear Commissioner Members,
This “narrative” for the Notice of Intent is to address:
1. The current state of violation with the Conservation Commission
2. The work that was done in the winter of 21
3. The proposed work in the same area
4. The historical, present, and future use of my land in Brewster.
Our intent is to provide an example of how to use wetland areas under the claimed present
jurisdiction of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the Brewster Conservation Commission as
a representative board of the Town of Brewster, Massachusetts in the country of the United States
of America.
Wetland Resources:
Environmental Consulting & Restoration, LLC (ECR)completed a field review on March 3, 2022, to
document existing conditions of the site and completed a wetland delineation. The vegetated wetlands
on and near the site were delineated following the methodology established by the Massachusetts
Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) regulations found at 310 CMR 10.55 pertaining to the
delineation of Bordering Vegetated Wetlands.
The delineation was performed by analyzing vegetation, hydrology within 12 inches of the surface, and
soil conditions within 20 inches of the surface. The vegetated wetlands onsite contain hydric soils,
saturated soils, and dominant wetland indicator plants.
Wetland flags (pink & black striped ribbons) were placed on and near the site to mark the limit of the
vegetated wetlands. ECR also identified an intermittent stream that flows within the wetland system.
The stream originates from a small, ponded area within the northeastern-most portion of the wetland.
The stream flows to the southwest into a historic bog system and associated ditches.
Existing Conditions:
The site is located to the south of Main Street and consists of a commercial property with several
buildings, work areas, sheds, gravel/dirt roadways, walkways, gardens, etc. Wetland resource areas are
located through the central and southern portions of the site to the rear developed area along Main
Street.
The area of recent disturbance that we are addressing in this Notice of Intent took place in the winter of
22 located within a portion of wetland and buffer zone within the eastern, central portion of the site
along the existing dirt roadway that is used to access the rear of the property. Work was done to the
east and west of the existing roadway.
The unpermitted work within the wetland and buffer zone originated as a project undertaken by
Mosquito Control and myself, the property owner, who misunderstood the exemptions allowed under
the Wetland Protection Act and unknowingly committed the wetland violations. The work included
vegetation removal and the improvement of the existing roadway.
Please note, a limited amount of fill was used within the existing roadway and along the shoulder, but
beyond those areas the disturbance was isolated to vegetation cutting only. At this time, the disturbed
areas have been stabilized with erosion control blankets and straw.
For more information regarding the disturbed areas, please refer to the attached statement of Andrew
Neal who performed the work under supervision of Mosquito Control.
Brief history of the use of this property
Upon my arrival on the property in November of 1972 the ‘front lawn’ area still contained some
asparagus plants which were, from later research, an important crop to Brewster people in times past.
The ‘back lot’, or Ellis Property, had formerly been owned and farmed by Thadeus Ellis, was then owned
in 1972 by his son Robert Ellis who passed it on to his son Christopher Ellis from whom I bought the
property. Thadeus had planted apple and pear trees, some of which were still productive when I
purchased the orchard. Also on the property were a productive crop of blueberry, which ended up in
numerous blueberry pies, pancakes, and muffins. This agricultural use can easily be attested to by both
Chris and Ann Ellis who both live in Brewster today ( Ann lives across Main Street from my property in
her parents’ house).
I was told by Vernon Crownshaw of the Massachusetts Mosquito Control Commission that the
Commonwealth has maps describing this land as “orchard” and going back to the 1930’s.
Since May of 1973 when Eastleigh Nurseries first opened, this land has been engaged continuously in
agriculture and horticulture.
My “intention” for this land is to continue its agricultural use in any and all parts of the property, both
within and without wetland areas. I am entitled to an “agricultural exemption” from wetland laws and
by-laws which will support the present and future owners of this property in that usage. This land has
always been, and will always be, managed by organic standards. The ‘owners’ of this land are, and will
always be, better described as “stewards”, or “shepherds”, of this sacred land as different from the legal
term “owner”, or “landowner”.
The further intention for the use of this land is to be self-regulatory. The property is being sold to a co-
operative society whose by-laws are in harmony with most of Brewster’s wetland by-laws. But because
we can not condone the allowed use of Glysophate within wetland areas— or for that matter its use
anywhere on Planet Earth— and because we do not feel that Brewster is enthusiastically supportive of
agriculture, we choose to self-regulate using our own Earth-friendly laws that are agreed upon
democratically by the co-operative community and / or a Private Membership Association. We will
welcome help and advice from outside agencies or individuals as we form our own laws.
Management and planting plans for the property
The main focus of this NOI is to bring the property in to a state of restoration and out of violation.
However, I do want to go into a little detail about the future plans for the property.
ECR has designed a restoration narrative and plan specifically for the site to restore the portions of
wetland and buffer zone that were impacted by recent site disturbance. Specifically, the disturbed areas
as described above that include approximately 8,250 square feet of wetland and 1,010 square feet of
buffer zone.
The proposed restoration has been designed to restore lost wildlife habitat, re-establish lost biomass
and re-establish a native plant community that incorporates native species existing on the site as well as
species that will promote more biodiversity. The proposed restoration plan also includes inland bank
stabilization for the stream that flows within the wetland. The proposed restoration shall follow the
methodology below:
1. Collect and remove the straw that was previously spread throughout the restoration areas. Remove
the erosion control blankets that are located along the bank of the stream that flows through the
wetland.
2. Re-shape the Inland Bank to include excavating/pulling back existing sediment to a gentle grade for
permeant stabilization if necessary. At this point the banks seem stable and probably just need to be
planted.
3. Upon completion of stabilizing the Inland Bank, the top of the bank and adjacent disturbed areas shall
be stabilized with native plantings. If necessary, a thin layer (2-4 inches) of clean loam shall be installed
throughout the restoration area to supplement existing soils. (This should have been done in the spring,
but we were not allowed to plant the blueberries and elderberries that are not suffering in pots on the
property waiting to get planted.)
4. Replanting to restore the portion of the wetland that was impacted by the recent cutting activities.
We are proposing to revegetate the wetland with native shrubs and a native herbaceous seed mix. ECR
has designed the planting plan using DEP’s Wetland Replication Guidelines for work in Bordering
Vegetated Wetlands. Utilizing DEP guidance regarding shrub spacing, shrubs planted 10 feet on center
will require a total of 97 shrubs to restore the 8,250 square feet of disturbed wetland.
SHRUB SPECIES SIZE (height) NUMBER
American Elderberry (Sambucus canadensis) 1.5 - 2 ft 35
Black Chokeberry (Aronia melanocarpa) 1.5 - 2 ft 9
Highbush Blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum) 1.5 - 2 ft 35
Inkberry (Ilex glabra) 1.5 - 2 ft 9
Sweet Pepperbush (Clethra alnifolia) 1.5 - 2 ft 9
Total 97
Please note, to further supplement the restoration area additional Elderberry and Highbush Blueberry
shrubs may be planted in addition to the above proposed plantings.
5. Replanting to restore the portion of the buffer zone that was impacted by the recent cutting activities.
We are proposing to revegetate the buffer zone with native shrubs and a native herbaceous seed mix.
ECR has designed the planting plan using DEP’s Wetland Replication Guidelines for work in Bordering
Vegetated Wetlands. Utilizing DEP guidance regarding shrub spacing, shrubs planted 10 feet on center
will require a total of 12 shrubs to restore the 1,010 square feet of disturbed buffer zone.
Proposed Buffer Zone Plant Palette
SHRUB SPECIES SIZE (height) NUMBER
Bayberry (Myrica pennsylvanica) 1.5 - 2 ft 4
Spicebush (Lindera benzoin) 1.5 - 2 ft 4
Witch Hazel (Hamanmelis virginiana) 1.5 - 2 ft 4
Total 12
6. All plantings will be spaced at the direction of an overviewing wetland scientist to simulate natural
growth patterns. Upon completion of planting, the root zones of the plants will be mulched with a 1 to
2-inch-thick layer of leaf litter or other natural organic mulch.
7. All remaining areas of exposed soils within the wetland and buffer zone restoration areas have been
hand seeded with native seed mixes to stabilize and restore the herbaceous plant layer.
8. An irrigation schedule shall be established by the applicant here below.
9. We also need to build a rock retaining wall to stabilize the banking and define the farm access road
leading South across a culvert pipe. Cape Cod “native rock” will be used, and not rock imported from
‘across the bridge’. For several decades the trend in landscaping has been to import and use
Pennsylvania wall stone, and other imported stone, which have very much changed the character of
Cape Cod. This retaining wall, as well as strongly stabilizing the road banking, will also beautify the
Arboretum in an historically-appropriate manner.
Brewster Wetlands Protection Regulations Performance Standards:
3.01 Inland Banks:
(3) Activity within 50’ of any Bank: Regrading of slope and banks in disturbed area has been
performed and the banks are holding. We still need to mitigate the disturbance with the
proposed paintings. The 2’ retaining wall will further stabilize the area. This falls under Section
5.01 of Wetland regulations and we request to be allowed to perform this work
(4) Activity within 100’ of any Bank: The proposed activity of erosion stabilizing native plantings
will positively impact the stability and ecology of the area.
Summary:
We have designed this restoration plan according to DEP’s Guidelines and a portion of the recently
altered areas will re-vegetate naturally to coincide with the addition of new native plant biomass. We
believe that this restoration plan is suitable for the recent disturbance at 2624 Main Street in Brewster
and meets DEP’s Guidelines for restoration within a wetland and associated buffer zone.
The additional two disturbed areas that were previously identified by the Conservation Commission
within the southern-most portion of the site were also reviewed by ECR during the March site
inspection. There was minimal disturbance in these areas with very limited disturbance to the wetland
resource areas. Upon a recent inspection by Noelle from the town these areas were deemed re-
vegetated naturally and shall be monitored along with the restoration areas described above.
Other Areas of the Property we would like to address:
Native Elm trees died out across the country because of Dutch Elm Disease many decades ago. I clearly
can see in my mind’s eye three massive and grand old Elm trees directly across Main Street from this
property. We have obtained a disease-resistent variety of Elm and potted them for planting as soon as
the present issues with the Brewster Cons Comm are resolved. Hopefully these trees will grow once
again in their grandeur within our evolving Arboretum and within Brewster, as we are saving some for
sale to those folks who wish to help re-establish them.
Paw Paw tree is an indigenous plant of this continent, and we will be planting them to help restore a
sustainable ‘edible forest’ food source on Cape Cod. Here is more from National Park Service :
Sep 21, 2021 Pawpaw trees in the forest understory NPS With leaves and branches that deer avoid, and
fruit that is loved by all, the pawpaw ( Asimina triloba) is a fascinating native tree. It's the only local
member of a large, mainly-tropical plant family (Annonaceae), and produces the largest edible fruit
native to North America.
Soil that is well-drained, deep, fertile, and slightly acidic (pH 5.5 to 7.0) is ideal, but trees will grow fine
on most soils that contain adequate levels of calcium as determined by a soil test and if mulched.
We intend to experiment with Paw Paw by planting both at the edge of a wetland area so that roots can
seek moisture, and within wetland, so as to determine whether this food source might be a future,
drought-tolerant tree as the climate changes unfavorably for our most relied upon species- apple, pear,
peach, cherry, nut trees, etc.
Expand the established orchards throughout the property ( including the Paw Paw ), within areas
recently demarcated by a ‘wetland survey’ which presently hold, or historically held, orchard plants.
Remove invasive species, at our discretion, throughout the property : Bittersweet, Japanese knotweed,
Honeysuckle, etc.
An electric service will be installed to service the “back lot” via either of the 30-foot right of way roads
entering from Thad Ellis Road. Eversource has been unable to approve a plan for almost a year ( ! ), and
so we do not yet know where the line will come from. We ask that installation of power from either
direction be approved as there will be no impact upon wetlands from either avenue. If this underground
service cannot be approved, then we must pursue the installation of electric poles which, though
considerably less expensive, are more dangerous (many large trees) and less pleasing aesthetically.
Clearing of woody vegetation and maintain a five-foot access space on either side of the Consodine
Ditch so that State Mosquito Control can better service the ditches.
Clearing of woody vegetation and maintain a 7 foot access space along the Western property line from
Main Street to the pond. Clearing and maintenance of property lines is allowed by right for property
owners throughout Massachusetts ( and probably the nation ).
maintain all existing “farm roads” as shown on Farm Plan of 2008.
probably more that I can’t think of right now…
NOTES of September 13th, 2022 :
The loam pile in ‘back lot’ has been 3/4 removed and used around the farm for leveling and seeding. The
remaining 1/4 will be used for the restoration plantings.
The composting of orange peels was discontinued after your concern was expressed, and Manuel (
Snowy Owl ) has found another person to take the rinds. We had no other space that we wished to use
for this purpose that was not within a wetland border. We never felt that there was any threat to the
wetlands because, as Noelle noted during her site visit last week, there is a berm between where the
rinds were composting and the wetland.
Andrew Neal, who assisted the Mosquito Control agent Vernon Crownshaw in the improvements of the
Consodine Ditch, has written a statement and is included in this packet. I will be gone for September and
October for dental appointments there, and to continue building our Great Cape Herbs subsidiary,
Boticario dos Acores.
I may also have a letter from an abutting neighbor couple, Ken and Joan Benson, who report their first
year with no basement flooding, likely the result of the work we did to improve the Consodine Ditch and
successfully get the water moving once again.
I will ask Stacey and Josh, who abut the puddle in Area 1, if they have noticed any changes to water
issues. In years past when my long-time friend Bruce Scott owned that property, the water from the
puddle would sometimes rise as high as the middle of his back yard ( ! ).
And there were many times when, because of the clogged and collapsed culvert pipe, the water would
flow over the road— a rise of some three feet.
Administrative Review
Conservation Commission Meeting - October 11, 2022
Administrative Report – Request for Administrative Reviews
Memo to: Brewster Conservation Commission
From: Chris Miller and Andreana Sideris
RE: October 11, 2022 Administrative Reviews
1. David Koret proposes to remove two pine trees, one dead and one leaning over house, at 52 Turning Mill Road,
33/32 (39/6-10).
Project: Both trees pose a risk to health and safety. Work falls under activities covered by Administrative Review
Recommend: Approve Administrative Review
2. Bettina Veitch proposed to remove invasive vines within 50 and 100 feet of inland wetlands at 72 Canoe Pond
Drive, 24/63 (36/233).
Project: Invasive vines will be cut at the base of the vines and removed from trees, roots shall remain in place.
Work falls under activities covered by Administrative Review
Recommend: Approve Administrative Review
Administrative Review
Conservation Commission Meeting - October 11, 2022
Administrative Report – Report of the Natural Resources Director
Memo to: Brewster Conservation Commission
From: Chris Miller
RE: Report of the Natural Resources Director
Spruce Hill stairs extended by three steps, bottom two currently buried into beach. Added section of drift fence.