Laserfiche WebLink
 Suggests changing the rate references for the projected rate of sea level rise <br />based on the historical sea level rise in Massachusetts rather than using the <br />current climate science data <br />Commented \[AM1\]: I think what Sarah suggested was <br />changing the references to projected sea level rise currently <br />1. Proposes using a rate of 4 feet of sea level rise by the year 2100, which is an <br />based on historical data for Massachusetts to using current <br />average based on several sources, including the Cape Cod Commission, NOAA, <br />climate change science data instead. <br />and the Fifth National Climate Assessment. <br />Commented \[AP2R1\]: This I will need Sarah to clarify for <br />us. <br />2. Suggests adding a more specific rate relevant to the southern coast of Cape Cod <br />and providing a citation for homeowners to obtain more information. <br />3. Awaiting correspondence from 2 colleagues and researchers at the Northeast <br />Climate Adaptation Science Center. <br /> Define permissible walls within land subject to coastal storm flowage. For <br />other walls mentioned in the regulation, defer to Commissioner Cook's <br />expertise to provide functional examples for engineers and homeowners. <br /> No issues <br /> No issues <br /> No issues <br /> To reinstate despite its previous removal due to the Conservation <br />Commission's enforcement capacity concerns. However, it is believed that the <br />restrictions are appropriate and should remain in place. It is also advocated <br />that if additional capacity is needed to enforce current regulations or any <br />future revisions, the Commission should pursue all avenues to secure that <br />support on behalf of the Conservation Department, rather than loosening the <br />standards in place for the robust protection of resource areas. <br /> Refer to Standard 11 <br /> No issues <br /> No issues <br /> No issues <br /> No issues <br /> Challenges the second part and advocates that the provisions herein do apply <br />within the 150-foot buffer. <br /> <br />ASSISTANT AGENT FEEDBACK <br /> <br />Upon reviewing the Regulation 25 draft, it is evident that the performance <br />standards effectively reduce nitrogen loading and improve stormwater recharge rates. <br /> <br />However, the draft lacks opportunities for creativity or innovation on individual <br />properties, despite rapidly changing technology. <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br /> <br />