1/31/2013 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes

Home Browse Search

i and engineered plan. This enforcement order will also include the installation of rubber spaces to ensure a minimum of 1 T spacing. Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve the issuances o f both enforcement orders as stated by the agent B. Tidewatch— Beach Nourishment hment Agent McManus states that Mr. Berman's report suggests that it does not do any good to attempt to figure out what the parties involved were thinking in the 1993 Order of Conditions and how they had core up with the 1500 cubic yards per year. The agent says that he believes there was some kind of professional input to arrive at that amount but the recommendations from Mr. Berman are all in the report. The agent states that the Order of Conditions [file #43-1166] contains no profiling information# notification dates and no staking of any kind for the record. Mr. Fogel had submitted slips from E- o e It showing delivery of sand to New Seabury; 28 yards per load. Agent McManus states that although that is proof of delivery, the Order of Conditions has specific orders of beach profiling, seven-day prior notification, staking in the field as well as sand grain analysis and none of this documentation has been submitted since 1993. Mr. Fogel states that he would like summarize ghat he knows; the Order 43-1166 that was issued in 1993 did not have a beach nourishment requirement but it was amended in 1995 where the 1500 cubic yards was added. Mr. Fogel says that at that time, New Seabury owned the condominiums. In 1997, the order of Conditions was issued for 43-1552 for revetment work which carried forward the 1500 cubic yards but the prior Conservation Agent issued documentation that stated to hold off the nourishment until a regional nourishment plan was issued. The records from BSC Group who was working with New Seabury at the time included a summary of the beach nourishment that had been done during that period which summarizes approximately 1700 cubic yards was placed during the course of 1998, 1999 &2000. Mr. Fogel says in 2000, a partial Certificate of Compliance was submitted because Borne of the condo units were being sold and then a complete Certificate of Compliance for 43-1552 was issued in 2001 with perpetual conditions that dict not include the beach nourishment. He states that for over 10 years, 2001 to 2911, when the current Order of Conditions 3-2844 was issued that thea was no beach nourishment obligation during that time but even if there had been, they had given Drew records from E-Z DOZE IT frorn some revetment repair around 2004- 2008. Mr. Fogel states that E-Z Doze It brought in about 4200 cubic yards at that time so there is a history of about 8000 cubic yards brought in between 1993 and 2005. Mr. Fogel states that Mr. Be rm an's report co.n cu rs.with the analysis that Les Smith, Coa taI Geologist from Epsilon Associates and Don Monroe from Coastal Engineering, did where they determined that coastal bank retreat translated into a mitigation requirement would have been the equivalent of 360 cubic yards annually. Mr. Fogel states that this is consistent with the other Order of Conditions that the Conservation Board issued to other properties further east. Mr. Fogel states that there have been Certificate of Compliances issued for all but one of the properties east of Tidewatch that eliminated beach nourishment requirement as a perpetual requirement which may be Contributing to the shortage of material for the whole system. Mr. Fogel says that the current order of Conditions that has the 1500 cubic yards is an open order and based on the information that they provided and the information that Mr. Berman concurs with; it is their suggestion that they would propose to file a request for a Certificate of Compliance for the project that would put the 380 cubic yards annually in as a perpetual requirement for Tidewatch as well as the annual profiles and related provisions. Mr. Fogel notes that the requirement should be for a minimum of 380 cubic yards based on profiling. Mr. Fogel states that there is a condition in the order to coordinate with their neighbors on beach nourishment which they are prepared to do;they have tried to negotiate access with New Seabury which is a pending item and most likely waiting for resolution of other items. Mr. Fogel says that they are prepared now to add 360 cubic yards to New Seabury to contribute to stabilization of the core envelopes and add sand on the beach where Tidewatch owners have an easement.