When the Mattapoisett Conservation Commission met on September 29 several of the applications both new and those returning as continued hearings contained critical wording, “coastal storm flowage.”
A quick look at Massachusetts General Law finds wording throughout the text that provides guidance and rules on types of construction that may be permitted in such areas as barrier beaches, sand dunes, and other jurisdictional shore location.
As noted in Mass.gov 92.1 Coastal Banks, the language goes like this: “When a landform, other than a coastal dune, has a slope that is so gentle and continuous that it does not act as a vertical buffer and confine elevated storm waters, that landform does not qualify as a coastal bank. Rather, gently sloping landforms at or below the 100-year flood elevation which have a slope less than 10:1 shall be regulated as “land subject to coastal storm flowage” and not as coastal bank. Land subject to coastal storm flowage may overlap other wetland resource areas such as coastal beaches and dunes.”
Such projects are commonly heard by conservation commissions whose oversight includes waterways, beaches, and the like. So it was when Richard Charon of Charon Engineering returned to the commission on this night to complete discussions and hear the verdict on a Notice of Intent filed by Kathleen and William Sylvia for property located at 41 Cove Street.
The project was described as the razing of an existing one-bed residence and the construction of a new home constructed to meet all FEMA requirements for flood zones. The topography of the parcel, a residential lot on barrier beach, required Charon to explain safety precautions during construction as well as construction standards geared towards minimizing disturbance to the lot itself and the surrounding resource areas. The entire parcel is considered land subject to coastal storm flowage.
Charon returned to the commission with a construction narrative that would later become part of the conditions imposed upon the project. He explained that the plan of record had been modified since first coming before the commission decreasing the amount of beach impacted from 750 square feet to 450 square feet with only 60 cubic yards of beach nourishment now planned. Charon said that over time the plan would allow the dune area to naturally build-up. He had previously stated that a sieve analysis would be included to ensure similar soils would be brought onto the site matching the existing beach sand.
Chairman Mike King said that the use of high-density matting during construction was “admirable” and adhered to the credo “first do no harm,” but he wondered aloud about the elevated pilings that would be used to construct the new home.
Charon described the process where 16-inch pointed steel pipes would be vibrated into the ground to a depth of 22 feet, saying, “It will be less intrusive.” He also commented that beach grasses to be removed and then returned to the lot would receive adequate sun after the home is completed.
King asked for a beach-grass restoration plan but agreed to accept a condition that directs the planting of grasses in 12×12-inch patches versus the USDA 24×24-inch requirement and annual reports to the commission over a two-year growing cycle to ensure propagation is achieved. There was no public comment when the hearing was opened to such. The commissioners unanimously agreed to condition the project with additional controls such as sieve analysis, 12×12-inch grass plantings, annual growing reports over two years, and construction narratives.
A Request for Determination of Applicability also for a project deemed land subject to coastal storm flowage, as submitted by Richard Cushing, 13 Beach Street, for the construction of a new shed was heard. The project received a negative determination of applicability, granting the application.
Virginia Corcora’s RDA filing for property located at 1 Hilton Avenue, land subject to coastal storm flowage, for a septic repair and upgrade also moved forward with a negative decision.
A new in-ground swimming pool received a negative decision when the RDA filed by Antone and Christine Moniz, 76 Mattapoisett Neck Road, was heard. Represented by Carmelo Nicolosi of Charon Engineering, the project will be located inland, subject to coastal storm flowage.
Conservation Agent Liz Leidhold reported that the municipality’s planned repair to a culvert and roadway span along Acushnet Road, which was to have been started and completed before September school openings, was on-hold. She said the contract was being awarded to another construction company and that, in the meantime, excavated areas would be stabilized with additional erosion controls and fast-growing winter grasses.
Leidhold also reported that restoration plans for damage done by herbicides to property located at 37 Water Street were not complete as of yet. She said that the property owner’s environmental scientist, Marc Maganello of LEC Environmental Consultants, has been working with her to complete plans for the revegetation of damaged wetlands. The property in question features a natural stream that empties into and onto the public beach.
The next meeting of the Mattapoisett Conservation Commission is scheduled for Monday, October 26, at 6:30 pm.
Mattapoisett Conservation Commission
By Marilou Newell