7/27/1989 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes

Home Browse Search

S July 27, 19$9 Fade 3. their bylaw passed. Congratulations. -To me that means that, among other things, you have the opportunity now to use your discretionary powers and review ratters before you. It no longer; means that you have to do things the way that DE P does and for the purposes of tonight's meeting, you can be open—minded and not really const.ra.in d. We the project tam, have spent considerable time on the site and have some very credible information for you to consider. In the report before the Commission there is an executive summary that I would like to go through, as far as the presentation. We have concluded that the coastal bank resource, at this site, acts as a vertical buffer only and that it does not contribute sediment to an adjacent fresh or saltwater wetland or coastal beach. It's clear that the regulatory definition of a coastal bank as outlined in the wetland protection act is inadequate to serve the situation specifically found on this property. Therefore we are proposing an understanding of the function of this land form to further clarify the boundary of the coastal bank and the associated buffer zone. .. The land form abutting the marshs of Jehu Pond Great River system is partially inundated by the 100 year storm. It is an A zone under- the FIMA flood snap system. This means there is a lack of significant wave activity. There is no area great enough to allow a three foot break in the waves to occur on this lard form. The land form is inundated by surge elevation f the 100 year flood. . The dense cover vegetated with high permeable soils, there is no evidence of creeping mass movement, soil instability, or any other evidence of water related erosion that characterize the seaward facing slopes of this land orm The slopes vary extensively 4 t and some significant breaks occur anywhere between elevations 3 ft. and 40 f t. We feel Lhat there was a need to be consistent with the definition of the land form and not encumber the regulatory process with a line that fluctuates between 8 ft. and 40 ft. The major break in slope occurs at an elevation and distance from the influence of the 100 year storm that it is unreasonable to consider that the entire seaward facing slope is significant to the statuatory interests of flood control and storm damage prevention portions, if not all of the land farm below the 100 year flood elevation are significant to flood control and storm damage prevention; there's no argument there. But, we feel that portions above the 100 Year flood elevation are riot likely to be significant to flood control or storm damage prevention. In fact, the Portions above the 100 year flood plain are not signiricant to flood control because the flood does not reach these elevations. R ecentiy there has been more of an acceptance of the fact: that sea .level rise is going to impact flood p Lain areas and that likely effect, 1, e feel , at a minimump another