Conservation Commission

City of Gloucester

August 5, 2026 5:30 P.M. Hybrid Meeting Rose Baker Center for Aging Well - Upstairs Conference Room Co-Chairs; Ann Jo Jackson & Peter Vetere

August 5, 2026 MINUTES

Members Present: Co-Chair Ann Jo Jackson, Co-Chair Peter Vetere, Bill Cook, Nick Iliades, and Dave Sargent.

Members Absent:

Staff: Chuck Schade, Conservation Agent

Meeting was called to order at 5:30; the call of Commissioners commenced.

I. ADMINISTRATIVE BRIEFING

Chuck Schade, Conservation Agent, said the NHESP draft priority species habitat map has been updated and is going through a public comment period until October 4, 2026. There are not a lot of changes, but there is one additional polygon on Marble Road. There are new 310 CMR 10.00 regulations regarding ecological restoration streamlining. There have been a couple information sessions and there will be a virtual public hearing on Monday August 10th, at 1pm and 6pm. You have to pre-register to attend the hearing on Mass.gov. Finally, the updated fee structure that the Commission approved will be in front of City Council on Tuesday, August, 11, 2026.

II. PUBLIC COMMENT

Co-Chair Vetere opened the public comment period.

Co-Chair Vetere closed the public comment period.

III. MINUTES REVIEW AND APPROVAL

July 15, 2026

Co-Chair Jackson moved to approve the July 15, 2026 meeting minutes as amended; Member Cook seconded and was approved by Members Cook, Sargent, Iliades, Vetere, and Jackson.

IV. CONTINUED BUSINESS

NOI 028-3006 105 Wingaersheek Road (125 Wingaersheek LLC). Replace existing SFH and detached garage with pile-supported single family home and garage, installation of gravel driveway, installation of septic system and water service in Coastal Dune, Barrier Beach, LSCSF, ACEC, Buffer Zone to ACEC and BVW. Joel Favazza, Seaside Legal Solutions, P.C. (Previously continued to 9/16/2026)

NOI 028-3007 107 Wingaersheek Road (125 Wingaersheek LLC). Replace existing SFH and garage with pile-supported single family home and garage, expansion of gravel driveway, installation of septic system and water service in Coastal Dune, Barrier Beach, LSCSF, ACEC, Buffer Zone to ACEC and BVW. Joel Favazza, Seaside Legal Solutions, P.C. (Previously continued to 9/16/2026)

NOI 028-3125 490R Washington Street (Gregory Dumas). Elevating existing home and associated supporting posts in Riverfront Area, Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage, and Buffer Zone to Coastal Resource Areas. Devere Edwards-Grant, Kneeland Construction (Previously continued to 8/19/2026)

NOI 028-3129 24 Kondelin Road (Eastern Waste Services LLC). Stormwater Management upgrade, parking lot repaving, and fence replacement in Buffer Zone to Bordering Vegetated Wetland. Joel Favazza, Seaside Legal Solutions, P.C. (Previously continued to 8/19/2026)

NOI 028-2976 171 & 281R Magnolia Avenue (How-Mag LLC). Construction of a 26-unit residential subdivision in Riverfront Area and Buffer Zone to Bordering Vegetated Wetland. Evin Guvendiren, DeRosa Environmental Consulting, Inc. (Request to continue to 9/16/2026)

Co-Chair Jackson moved to continue NOI 028-2976 171 & 281R Magnolia Avenue to the September 16, 2026 meeting; Member Cook seconded and was approved by Members Cook, Sargent, Iliades, and Jackson.

NOI 028-3127 13-37 Sunset Hill Road, 6R & 18 Riverview Road (Pole's Hill) (Cape Ann Trail Stewards) Trail maintenance and trail bridge installation in Intermittent Stream, BVW, IVW, and Buffer Zone to Intermittent Stream, BVW, IVW, and Vernal Pool. Amy Blondin, Cape Ann Trail Stewards (Request to continue to 8/19/2026)

Co-Chair Jackson moved to continue NOI 028-3127 13-37 Sunset Hill Road, 6R & 18 Riverview Road (Pole's Hill) to the August 19, 2026 meeting; Member Cook seconded and was approved by Members Cook, Sargent, Iliades, and Jackson.

NOI 028-3036 3, 6, & 7 Welch Lane and R Woodman Street (RDL Welch Lane, LLC). Road and stormwater system construction, utility installation in Buffer Zone to Bordering Vegetated Wetlands. Joel Favazza, Seaside Legal Solutions, P.C. (Request to continue to 9/2/2026)

Co-Chair Jackson moved to continue NOI 028-3036 3, 6, & 7 Welch Lane and R Woodman Street to the September 2, 2026 meeting; Member Cook, seconded and was approved by Members Cook, Sargent, Iliades, Vetere, and Jackson.

NOI 028-3132 13 Concord Street (James Nicholas and Judy Rose). After the fact approval for vegetation and tree removal and relocation of rock wall in Riverfront Area, LSCSF, and Buffer Zone to Salt Marsh. James Nicholas and Judy Rose (Request to continue to 9/2/2026)

Co-Chair Jackson moved to continue NOI 028-3132 13 Concord Street to the meeting of September 2, 2026; Member Cook seconded and was approved by Members Cook, Sargent, Iliades, Vetere, and Jackson.

NOI 028-3130 11, 17, & R Dory Road (Brian Mulloney). Stormwater management system in Buffer Zone to Bordering Vegetated Wetland and alteration to Isolated Vegetated Wetland. Greg J. Hochmuth, Epsilon Associates, Inc.

Maggie Laracy, Langan Engineering, and Greg Hochmuth, Epsilon Associates, represented.

Ms. Laracy said a few weeks ago they received peer review comments and they responded to them. Some responses were received later in the day and the Commission wanted a chance to review that letter before making a decision. There have been no changes to the project since the last meeting.

Co-Chair Vetere opened and closed the public comment period.

ROLL CALL COMMISSIONER COMMENTS:

Member Sargent asked for them to confirm that bedrock is not in the wetland replication area. Because wetland replications have a low long term viability, he would like a five year monitoring period for the wetland replication area. He would also like a continuing condition as noted on the Certificate of Compliance that the replicated wetland should be monitored and maintained to function as designed. In the event that the wetland replication boundaries need to be adjusted, the wetland replication areas should be excavated, scarified, and protected from compaction before other construction activities can begin. The wetland specialist overseeing the wetland replication work may not be from the same company that is performing the seeding or participation in any aspect of the wetland replication. Plants should be selected from nurseries that have been inspected by state or federal agencies.

Co-Chair Vetere would like a condition as suggested by Weston & Sampson to conduct additional test pits in the stormwater detention basin area. He would like the results to be submitted to the Commission before construction begins.

Co-Chair Jackson said W&S also suggested they update groundwater recharge calculations. The narrative indicated they do not meet the required recharge volume due to site constraints.

Ms. Laracy said they have conducted the additional test pits suggested by W&S. They hit pretty high groundwater. The basin was designed as a detention basin because they did not have test pits there. They have since done them and it is not going to work as an infiltration basin. They can formally submit that information. They are meeting the groundwater recharge calculations to the maximum extent practicable because of the ledge. The presence of ledge varies so much throughout the site. She can also include this information in a formal write up and submit it to the Commission. She said the proposed wetland replication area does not have ledge and is suitable for replication.

Co-Chair Jackson moved to close the public hearing for NOI 028-3130 11, 17, & R Dory Road; Member Cook seconded and was approved by Members Cook, Sargent, Iliades, Vetere, and Jackson.

Co-Chair Jackson moved to approve NOI 028-3130 11, 17, & R Dory Road with the conditions mentioned in this and previous meetings; Member Cook seconded and was approved by Members Cook, Sargent, Iliades, Vetere, and Jackson.

NOI 028-3135 37 Rocky Neck Avenue Unit B-1 (Frederick Miles). Reconstruction of existing dwelling in the same footprint and new pier supports in Coastal Resource Areas, LSCSF, and Buffer Zone to Coastal Resource Areas. John Judd, Gateway Consultants, Inc. (Request to continue to 9/2/2026)

Co-Chair Jackson moved to continue NOI 028-3135 37 Rocky Neck Avenue Unit B-1 to the meeting of September 2, 2026; Member Cook seconded and was approved by Members Cook, Sargent, Iliades, Vetere, and Jackson.

AMD 028-1653 36 Atlantic Street (Village at West Gloucester Condominium Trust). Amendment to OOC 028-1653 to change continuing conditions under the Gloucester Wetlands Ordinance. Scott Eriksen, Perkins & Anctil, P.C.

Scott Eriksen, Perkins & Anctil, represented and said at the last meeting they received comments on how to revise the de-icing plan and fertilization management plan. They have submitted those changes as well as site plans of the area they are intending to apply chemicals.

Co-Chair Vetere opened the public comment period.

Patti-Ann Page, 173 Concord Street, provided a document from 2004 of all the various reporting requirements that are part of this project. Various reports are supposed to go to ConCom, Planning, and the Board of Health. She said the reports need to be tied together and be required as a part of this decision. The reporting documents should go to a City group instead of being kept until asked for.

Rus Brown, Metaxas Brown Pidgeon LLP, represented Ms. Page and he said they are happy with the continued prohibition of herbicides and pesticides. However, there are still concerns with enforcement as the original conditions were not being enforced. He suggested it be a condition that these requirements should be written into the conditions of the service provider to present a plan to the Conservation Commission at the beginning of each season.

Mr. Erikson said they have had conversations with the BOH and they intend to work with them and meet the requirements. Most of the reporting requirements relate to the O&M and the health department.

Co-Chair Vetere said some of the reporting conditions relate to permits not issued by the Conservation Commission. However, there are some conditions on the OOC that mention reports to the Conservation Commission. Those obligations still apply and should be submitted to the appropriate departments. If they are already making reports to other departments about the fertilizer applications, those should be submitted to ConCom as well.

Co-Chair Vetere closed the public comment period.

ROLL CALL COMMISSIONER COMMENTS:

Member Cook said he is okay with the conditions discussed tonight.

Member Sargent requested a condition prohibiting the application of fertilizer in close proximity to impervious surfaces or drainage structures and no application if heavy rain is predicted within the next 24 hours.

Co-Chair Vetere said he doesn't have anything additional besides the new annual reporting requirement of fertilizer and de-icer application.

Mr. Schade asked what their intended timeline is after they receive an amended Order of Conditions.

Co-Chair Vetere said since the development is completed, they could file for a Certificate of Compliance and officially close out the permit with these continuing conditions.

Co-Chair Jackson moved to close the public hearing for AMD 028-1653 36 Atlantic Street; Member Cook seconded and was approved by Members Cook, Sargent, Iliades, Vetere, and Jackson.

Co-Chair Jackson moved to approve AMD 028-1653 36 Atlantic Street with the conditions mentioned in this and previous meetings; Member Cook seconded and was approved by Members Cook, Sargent, Iliades, Vetere, and Jackson.

NOI 028-3141 28 King Phillip Road (David Surette). Seasonal dock and gangway to existing pier in Coastal Resource Areas and Riverfront Area. Thomas P. Ciarametaro, Jr., Five Fathoms Consulting

Tom Ciarametaro, Five Fathoms Consulting, represented and said they submitted a document addressing some of the comments from the previous meeting. This is a seasonal 10 x 20 foot float with 200 square feet. This encroaches on land containing shellfish, so they have proposed a fifth wheel connection system that eliminates the need for bottom chains, anchors, moorings or other hardware that typically drags across the bottom of tidal flats. They will flow through decking to maximize light penetration through the structure. They have incorporated DMF comments and are proposing four inch standoffs on 30 inch posts so a few square feet of the float will actually touch the bottom during low tide. The project has been designed to meet all applicable standards in the Wetlands Protection Act. There are roughly 15 other seasonal floats in the Little River that have the same features that they are proposing. The float will not land in the shellfish area, but rather a marsh area with no grass.

Co-Chair Vetere opened and closed the public comment period.

ROLL CALL COMMISSIONER COMMENTS:

Member Cook said during the previous NOI process, they were told this proposal would not happen.

Member Sargent thanked them for the proposal of securing the float to a fifth wheel hitch. This would remove the need for helical anchors or mooring blocks. He would like to see future applications use this method. However, there is uncertainty on what substrate the float would land on. At the last meeting, it was stated that the float would land on an upper marsh area that is degraded and has been eroded by green crabs. The NOI application says it would impact 200 square feet of shellfish habitat area. A floating dock may not rest on a salt marsh even if it is degraded. The weight of a dock would compress the underlying peat, changing the elevation and making the salt marsh more prone to erosion and increased wave activity, making it difficult for vegetation to become reestablished. He mentioned the reservations noted by the Shellfish Constable and suggested a kayak lift on the end of the dock. It would allow them to achieve the stated goal of launching kayaks and paddleboards without impacting coastal resource areas.

Member Iliades said it seems like the applicant has done what they could to alleviate the concerns. The pier is already there, but it is questionable what kind of land the float will land on. He is concerned by the Shellfish Constable's concerns regarding the shellfish habitat.

Co-Chair Vetere echoed the Shellfish Constable's concerns. He would like more information from her regarding the location of the shellfish resource area in relation to the proposed float and gangway. He would also like to know if the proposed gangway would alter the productivity of the resource area based on the characteristics listed in 310 CMR 10.34(4). He would like to wait until we hear more information from Rebecca Visnick.

Co-Chair Jackson also remembers the previous discussions on this project and has the same concerns that she did then.

Mr. Schade said he reached out to shellfish to get clarification on Co-Chair Vetere's comments. He has not heard back yet.

Mr. Ciarmetaro said the float could easily be moved about 15 feet to the right and it would land completely on intertidal shellfish habitat. He said there are other floats in the same area landing on shellfish habitat as well. DMF had a few technical comments that they are willing to comply with. He would like to know which performance standards they are not meeting so they can try and meet them. They have tried to design something that has the least impact possible.

Co-Chair Vetere said 310 CMR 10.34(3) allows the shellfish constable to make a determination about the significance of land containing shellfish. 10.34(4) contains the performance standards and says no project should adversely affect such land by a change in productivity caused by six factors. He asked the shellfish constable to render an opinion as to whether or not this location would impact the productivity of the shellfish area based on those factors. He would like to withhold a vote until the shellfish constable is able to respond.

Co-Chair Jackson moved to continue NOI 028-3141 28 King Phillip Road to the August 19, 2026 meeting; Member Cook seconded and was approved by Members Cook, Sargent, Iliades, and Jackson.

NOI 028-XXXX 7 Sumac Lane (James Montagnino, Jr.). Seasonal docks and gangway in Coastal Resource Areas. James Montagnino, Jr.

Co-Chair Jackson moved to continue NOI 028-XXXX 7 Sumac Lane to the August 19, 2026 meeting; Member Cook seconded and was approved by Members Cook, Sargent, Iliades, and Jackson.

NOI 028-3142 Tommy's Island (Tommy Island, LLC). Construction of a shed in the Upland Edge to the ACEC, Riverfront Area, LSCSF, and Buffer Zone to Coastal Resource Areas. John Judd, Gateway Consultants, Inc.

John Judd, Gateway Consultants, represented and said at the last meeting it was requested that they provide more photographs of the proposed shed location. There is no access to the island at low tide. He showed a photo and said there is a rock along the edge of the salt marsh grass that the applicant is planning on bringing a skiff to when they are on the island. There are 12 feet across the salt marsh to reach the upland edge. They also supplied an email from the building inspector saying this structure could be permitted as an accessory unit without a principal building as long as there is no plumbing or water supply. They were also requested to provide a waiver request for the GWO at the last meeting which they are still working on.

Co-Chair Vetere opened and closed the public comment period.

COMMISSIONER ROLL CALL COMMENTS:

Member Cook said he is hesitant considering this is in the ACEC. Any structure will encourage people to pull structures up to the island and start walking through an undisturbed area. This has been undisturbed for a long time.

Member Sargent referenced comments from the shellfish department which noted that there were six young trees in the area where the shed is proposed, which contradicts the submitted narrative. Shellfish also noted that the salt marsh was covered in poison ivy, which the applicant would likely remove. Poison ivy is native and an essential food source for migrator birds. Access to the island is through salt marsh which would trample vegetation and compress the area leaving it vulnerable to erosion, wave activity, and would make it difficult for vegetation to re-establish. It is difficult to determine how there would be no impact based on this proposal.

Member Iliades said this shack would presumably be used during waterfowl hunting season which is in the fall and winter. The salt marsh would be dormant during that portion of the year, so it's something they should also be considering.

Co-Chair Vetere seconded earlier comments. He would also like to see evidence that they qualify for a waiver for adding impervious surface in the Upland Edge and developing the ACEC.

Mr. Schade said the GWO requires that no vegetation should be cut in the Upland Edge, so it's not just trees with a diameter over six inches. There are still questions about the disturbance to the salt marsh and the tidal flats with foot traffic and boats.

Mr. Judd said they intended to put it back where it was to reduce the impacts as much as possible. He did not notice any substantial vegetation in the proposed shed area, but they can relocate it to another area where there is no vegetation removal. They will gather materials for the next meeting to respond to all the comments.

Co-Chair Jackson moved to continue NOI 028-3142 Tommy's Island to the August 19, 2026 meeting; Member Cook seconded and was approved by Members Cook, Sargent, Iliades, and Jackson.

V. NEW BUSINESS

NOI 028-XXXX 11 Forest Lane (City of Gloucester DPW). Removal of beaver dam and installation of beaver deceiver on Walker Creek. Shavaun Callahan

Co-Chair Jackson moved to withdraw without prejudice NOI 028-XXXX 11 Forest Lane; Member Cook seconded and was approved by Members Cook, Sargent, Iliades, Vetere, and Jackson.

NOI 028-3144 62 Woodward Avenue (Philip Gouzoule). Rebuild of dwelling in Riverfront Area, Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage, and Buffer Zone to Coastal Resource Areas. Philip Gouzoule

Philip Gouzoule represented and said this house was destroyed by a fire about a year ago and they are proposing to rebuild it in the existing foundation that was saved. They are not altering the seawall or adding any fill to the property. They did make changes to the interior rebuild because of the floodzone. They are allowing water in and out of the basement to satisfy building department requirements.

Co-Chair Vetere opened the public comment period.

George Adams, 64 Woodward Avenue, and Kim Lesko, 53, 55, & 65 Woodward Avenue spoke in support of the project.

Co-Chair Vetere closed the public comment period.

COMMISSIONER ROLL CALL COMMENTS:

Member Cook asked for the appropriate fencing to be put in place to prevent debris from entering the resource area.

Co-Chair Vetere commented that the drawing did not show any landscaping plants around the house. He would like a landscaping plan to be submitted to the agent. He would like to see what will be grass, and what will be planted.

Mr. Schade asked them to inform him when the erosion control is in place. It is a high wind area, so they should make sure the proper precautions are in place to make sure nothing enters the resource areas.

Co-Chair Jackson moved to close the public hearing for NOI 028-3144 62 Woodward Avenue; Member Cook seconded and was approved by Members Cook, Sargent, Iliades, Vetere, and Jackson.

Co-Chair Jackson moved to approve NOI 028-3144 62 Woodward Avenue with the conditions mentioned in this and previous meetings; Member Cook seconded and was approved by Members Cook, Sargent, Iliades, Vetere, and Jackson.

NOI 028-3147 12 Woodward Avenue (William Pierce). Pile supported pier, seasonal ramp and float in Riverfront Area and Coastal Resource Areas. John Judd, Gateway Consultants, Inc.

John Judd, Gateway Consultants, represented and said they are proposing a pier. They have received comments from the DMF and they are okay with the proposed standoffs and the height above the salt marsh. They are proposing a four foot wide pier to allow for the seasonal pulling back of the proposed ramp which is three feet wide. They are using 10 inch fiberglass piles that will be hand driven.

Co-Chair Vetere opened and closed the public comment period.

COMMISSIONER ROLL CALL COMMENTS:

Member Sargent said the previous NOI contained a lot of mitigation plantings and invasive species removal. The proposed pathway to the proposed gangway appears to go through the permitted mitigation area. He asked if there is a COC for this work, and if it was satisfactorily completed. He would like to see some mitigation for the impact of the salt marsh in the gangway. He suggested that the float be connected to the pier. He also suggested a receiver style connection similar in function with the fifth wheel hitch similar to what exists in Lanes Cove. He said they are still waiting on shellfish and harbormaster comments.

Member Iliades said the Harbormaster commented earlier in the day. He expressed concern about the location in terms of navigation and he asked for further clarification. He would like to see DMF comments incorporated into the plan and he would like to hear from shellfish.

Co-Chair Vetere asked if any vegetation was going to be removed for the access pad to the pier. He would like mitigation if so, and restoration for the square footage of piers located in the front area. Per the regulations under 10.58(5)(c-e), you have to do three times the square footage for non-compliance with the three criteria. Salt marsh restoration would be preferable. He asked if Chapter 91 approval is necessary. He would have a condition that requires Chapter 91 approval before beginning any work if permitting through them is required. He would also like a condition to implement all conditions suggested by the DMF. He also asked for a continuing condition requiring seasonal removal and storage of the ramp and float outside of the resource area.

Co-Chair Jackson said she would like to wait for shellfish comments and would like to see the harbormaster's comments be addressed.

Mr. Schade said there is no COC for the previous NOI. He clarified the harbormaster's comments that he is not concerned about navigation at high tide as there is plenty of water then. However, during low tide, there is a low channel, so he would like a better understanding of the proposal to make sure access is maintained. There is a public landing and other organizations upstream, so the impact during low tide would be helpful information to have.

Mr. Judd said they will discuss navigation with the harbormaster. They will obtain a Chapter 91 license if it is required. They will revise the plan to include the RFA degradation and the required mitigation.

Co-Chair Jackson moved to continue NOI 028-3147 12 Woodward Avenue to the August 19, 2026 meeting; Member Cook seconded and was approved by Members Cook, Sargent, Iliades, and Jackson.

NOI 028-XXXX 18 Juniper Road (Maria & Arthur Churchill). Redevelopment and Reinforcement of an existing retaining wall in Riverfront Area and Coastal Resource Areas. John Judd, Gateway Consultants, Inc.

John Judd, Gateway Consultants, represented and said they are proposing to restabilize the existing retaining wall. There are some non-natives along the top of the wall, so they are looking to replace them with native mitigation to fortify that area. They are going to do two inches of crushed stone behind the wall and have biodegradable jute netting to allow for proper drainage. The existing shoreline at the toe of the blocks would remain. They are not expanding the wall, but they are repairing it.

Co-Chair Vetere opened the public comment period.

Stephen Goodick, 24 Thurston Point Road, spoke in support of the project.

ROLL CALL COMMISSIONER COMMENTS:

Member Cook said they are raising the existing wall by two feet. He is not sure if that would be considered armoring the bank.

Member Sargent commented that the concrete wall is coincidental with the top of the Coastal Bank for the whole section. Both cross sections indicate there will be some excavation, preservation of the wall, and therefore there will be impacts to the Coastal Bank. This impact should be quantified and there should be an investigation of an alternative location of the wall that will set it back further from the top of the Coastal Bank. This would be preferable than what is proposed. All work should be accomplished from the landward side. There should be a two year monitoring for the mortality of all mitigation plants. There should be a perpetual condition noted on the COC that prohibits further alteration of the mitigation area except as may be required to maintain the area in its mitigated condition. Yard waste should be disposed of properly.

Member Iliades seconded DEP's comments about potentially moving the wall further back.

Co-Chair Vetere suggested adding invasive mitigation as part of the restoration measures.

Co-Chair Jackson said the narrative mentions the blocks are chemically stable during the curing process. What does that mean? What are these chemicals that are not stable? For the mitigation, They are planting nine shrubs, eight feet apart for a total of 278 square feet. That would mean the shrubs should have a canopy diameter of greater than six feet and there would still be two feet of space between them.

Mr. Schade said there was indication that yard waste is being pushed over the wall and that is not what they want to see in areas like this.

Mr. Judd said they will add invasive species removal to the narrative. They will also revisit the square footage and mitigation calculations. They can revisit the location of the wall based on DEP and Commissioner comments. As far as the concrete blocks are concerned, this was addressed by a representative from Shea Concrete. He isn't sure if this was included in the application or was in the file. He will submit the letter. The chemical reactions are complete once the blocks are installed.

Co-Chair Jackson said she's no longer concerned if the blocks are fully cured before they are installed.

Co-Chair Jackson moved to continue NOI 028-XXXX 18 Juniper Road to the August 19, 2026 meeting; Member Cook seconded and was approved by Members Cook, Sargent, Iliades, and Jackson.

NOI 028-XXXX Keystone Road from Essex Avenue to Winterhaven Road (Keystone Road Homeowners Association). Paving existing road in Buffer Zone to Bordering Vegetated Wetland. John Judd, Gateway Consultants, Inc.

John Judd, Gateway Consultants, represented and said the neighbors are looking to resurface an existing road. There is no drainage associated with the existing road. The tailings are impervious and they have provided a road section detail. The tailings range from 30 feet to 16 feet along the wetland to allow for traffic. In some areas where the road is larger than 20 feet wide, it will be reduced. Along the proposed resurfacing, they are proposed a crushed stone shoulder to allow for infiltration and treatment along the wetland. There is a decent amount of erosion along the road that they are going to stabilize. They have proposed erosion control along the entire limit of work. They are reducing a bit of pavement that has been compacted over time.

Co-Chair Vetere opened the public comment period.

Andrew Stevens, 10 Winterhaven Road, said the road has seen more traffic since the road was initially designed and paving would be best for the residents.

Co-Chair Vetere closed the public comment period.

ROLL CALL COMMISSIONER COMMENTS:

Member Sargent asked about the size of crushed stone along the side of the road.

Co-Chair Vetere asked if they are paving the current width and then adding the crushed stone or is the crushed stone going within the width of the existing road. The plan does not say when the wetlands were delineated. The online maps, although they are not always accurate, show the wetlands being closer and going through the existing road. He suggested getting another delineation to update it. The wetlands shown on the plan appear to be part of a larger wetland system.

Mr. Schade said there were no wetland flags at the location so it was difficult to get an idea of the proposed roadway edge and the wetland location. The areas where the wetlands are closest to the road are the same areas where the proposed road exceeds the current gravel areas. The gravel edge is not shown on the plans, so it would be helpful to know if that is an addition to what is shown on the plans or included. The other portions of the wetland are further away from the road, but would be helpful to see wetland flags.

Mr. Judd said they can reflag the wetlands. The wetland delineation shown is a combination of historic work and was permitted through an old project about three to five years ago. They can reflag the area and show the limit of work. The roadway shown on the plan is for the actual pavement and does not include the additional shoulders. The stone would be an inch to an inch and a half.

Co-Chair Jackson moved to continue NOI 028-XXXX Keystone Road from Essex Avenue to Winterhaven Road to the August 19, 2026 meeting; Member Cook seconded and was approved by Members Cook, Sargent, Iliades, and Jackson.

NOI 028-3145 195 Atlantic Street (187 Atlantic Ave Holdings LLC). Duplex, driveway, retaining wall, and associated utilities in Buffer Zone to Bordering Vegetated Wetland and Coastal Resource Areas. Dan Sievers, Morin-Cameron Group, Inc.

Doug McDonald, Procopio Companies, and Dan Sievers, Morin-Cameron Group, represented.

Mr. Sievers said the project is within the 100 foot buffer zone to coastal resource areas, the FEMA flood zone AE, and the 100 foot buffer zone from a Bordering Vegetated Wetland. They are proposing to build a duplex and associated utilities and a driveway. They have a temporary construction access and storage bay in the buffer zone.

Co-Chair Vetere opened the public comment period.

John Myers, 198 Atlantic Street, said he appreciates the effort to move the septic system away from the existing properties. His comment for this project relates to this project and the neighboring project. The proposed area of impervious pacing is substantial for both properties. The driveways do not drain to the proposed basin and the piping does not extend beyond the frost line.

Co-Chair Vetere closed the public comment period.

COMMISSIONER ROLL CALL COMMENTS:

Member Cook requested a landscaping plan.

Member Sargent said in addition to a landscaping plan, it is unclear what work will take place or has taken place in the various buffer zones. He would like a detailed narrative describing that more thoroughly. He asked how many trees had been removed and how many are proposed to be replaced.

Co-Chair Vetere said he would like to see pervious driveways if possible. If not, he would like to see mitigation plantings for the square footage of additional impervious surface that is in the buffer zone. If the driveways are asphalt, he would like to see some feature capture runoff on the property. He asked if the city engineer reviewed and approved the stormwater report. He would also like a condition requesting the long term O&M report be recorded with the Order of Conditions. He asked who is responsible for compliance with the long term stormwater report. He would also like to see a condition prohibiting pesticides and herbicides.

Mr. Schade said the delineation was confusing as some of the buffer zones shown were related to Board of Health subcommittees. The larger plan shows a buffer zone to coastal resource areas, which is not something the commission has jurisdiction over. The commission also does not have a 100 foot buffer zone to coastal resource areas which is not what they review. The flood zone does not a buffer zone and the buffer zone for the coastal bank is not shown.

Mr. Sievers said they can revise the plan based on the Commission's comments. They can provide a landscaping plan and can revisit the design of the driveway. The stormwater was submitted to Gloucester Engineering about a year ago, and they did not receive any response. They will work on that. They can add no pesticides language to the O&M. The condo association will be responsible for compliance with the O&M plan.

Co-Chair Jackson said the tank has the capacity to hold waste for up to 24 hours and without electricity the pump won't be working.

The Commission determined they would like a backup generator pump for the septic tank in case of a long term power outage. It is not out of the norm for this area. They discussed the buffer zones planned and what should be submitted.

Co-Chair Jackson moved to continue NOI 028-3145 195 Atlantic Street to the August 19, 2026 meeting; Member Cook seconded and was approved by Members Cook, Sargent, Iliades, and Jackson.

NOI 028-XXXX 197 Atlantic Street (187 Atlantic Ave Holdings LLC). Driveway, retaining wall, associated grading and utilities in Buffer Zone to Bordering Vegetated Wetland. Dan Sievers, Morin-Cameron Group, Inc.

Dan Sievers, Morin-Cameron Group, represented and said they will correct the buffer zones on this plan as well.

Member Sargent said the building is very close to the edge of Riverfront Area. He asked what is proposed in that area. He asked for a narrative describing the work proposed in the buffer zones and resource areas. He would like a narrative explaining that work and what vegetation disturbance will be occurring.

Mr. Sievers said the RFA is their limit of work and they are putting erosion control along that line. The infiltration trench is running along the downgradient side of the proposed driveway. The trench outfall will be under the proposed driveway.

Co-Chair Vetere opened the public comment period.

Rob Gulla, 593 Essex Avenue, said he doesn't understand why they are jamming two houses up into a tight area.

Diane Finegold, 27 Wyoma Road, asked how herbicides and pesticides prohibitions are enforced. She is concerned how this will impact the shellfish flats.

John Myers, 198 Atlantic Street, said the impervious paved area is greater than 195 Atlantic. He would like to see reduced impervious areas or lower the pipe for the infiltration trench below the driveway. He would like rainwater to be treated onsite.

Robert Bishop, 176 Atlantic Street, said they leveled the whole site by blasting gravel and there are no trees left on site.

Co-Chair Vetere closed the public comment period.

COMMISSIONER ROLL CALL COMMENTS:

Member Cook said they need to look at the two projects as an entirety as this is a large area they are looking to build up. He would like an overview of the area with the delineation shown so they know what the final project will look like.

Member Iliades said he would like to see the delineations so they are able to determine what they have jurisdiction over.

Co-Chair Vetere said he has similar comments for this project that he did for 197 Atlantic Street. Once they have proper delineations they should be able to have better conversations. They will check with the city engineer to see if they have any questions on the stormwater report. He has the same condition requests that the O&M be recorded on the deed. The owner is responsible for compliance and if there is a report of herbicide or pesticide use they can investigate and ensure they are following the OOC and O&M.

Someone in the audience said there are seven total lots and only two of them are within conservation's jurisdiction. They are in the process of obtaining the necessary permits for all the lots they are developing.

Co-Chair Jackson moved to continue NOI 028-XXXX 197 Atlantic Street to the August 19, 2026 meeting; Member Cook seconded and was approved by Members Cook, Sargent, Iliades, and Jackson.

NOI 028-XXXX 740R Washington Street (Paul Hadley). Raise seawall in Riverfront Area, Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage and Buffer Zone to Coastal Resource Areas. Andrew Thibault, Goddard Consulting, LLC

Tom Shutz, Goddard Consulting, represented and said there is an existing building onsite and an associated deck and driveway. There is a large gravel area with a retaining wall and they are proposing to raise the seawall in this location. The entire property is within the 10 foot elevation so they are within Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flowage. The seawall is made of up large granite blocks and is quite low compared to the FEMA flood zone. The applicant frequently experiences large amounts of water on their property and they cannot use the dock on a few occasions. They would like to raise the granite block wall to an elevation of 8.2 and raise the gravel area to an elevation of 7.7. It will still be below the FEMA flood zone, but will prevent some larger tides from flooding the property.

Co-Chair Vetere opened the public comment period.

Rick Accardi, 742 Washington Street, said this project was previously denied in 2023 by the Commission and the DEP. A flood water flow path analysis and sufficient analysis was not provided to demonstrate how raising an existing sea wall and filling an associated tide land would impact the functions of LSCSF. They only calculated how much water would be displaced. They are concerned with the new flow of water if the seawall is raised. He spoke with professionals who think water will be displaced as a result of this project.

Sarah Austin, 731 Washington Street, said the wall is the same height from property to property. He is not working with the neighboring houses to ensure they are not being impacted.

Ed O'Reily, 4 Lane Road, said the flooding has gotten worse in this area.

Michael Layman, 27 Walnut Street, said it's not just a king tide that would cause major flooding that could impact the access to the floats. There was another house in Gloucester that raised their seawall and there have been no complaints from neighbors. It would be nice to speak to a professional about how this would impact surrounding properties.

John Blanding, 738 Washington Street, said this project involves building a new wall along the edge of his property. There is currently flooding and the water currently flows back into the river. There will now be a seawall prohibiting that.

Nathan Cohen, 6 Hickory Street, expressed concern about increased flooding and he understands the homeowners want to raise the seawall.

Mr. Accardi said the waterline at 740R Washington St recently broke and that's been contributing to the standing water.

Co-Chair Vetere closed the public comment period.

ROLL CALL COMMISSIONER COMMENTS:

Member Cook said he has the same issues now that he did when this was first proposed.

Member Sargent thanked them for providing the information that the theoretical increase would result in 22,000 of an inch increase and would not alter existing flood conveyance patterns.

Member Iliades said after reading through DEP's denial he agrees that no new information has been provided. He would like them to read through the denial and address the issues, especially the delineation of the resource areas. It was their opinion that the flow path analysis was not properly performed, and there was nothing new submitted to combat that. He would like an engineer's comments on the impact of raising the seawall.

Co-Chair Vetere said they denied the previous NOI for a lack of information. There was a narrative submitted that addresses the impact on neighboring properties. He is not sure what they submitted constitutes a flow path analysis, and he asked if something additional could be provided. A wetland scientist quoted by an abutter previously told him that there would be no impact by improving and raising a seawall in another cove in Gloucester. This is in an AE zone, so there aren't as intense waves in this area. He is concerned with raising the wall in areas where there was no existing wall and this could redirect floodwaters. If there is more analysis that can be done, he would like to see it.

Co-Chair Jackson seconded Member Iliades's comments. She is not opposed to the project, but would like more information to justify their decision.

Mr. Schade said the LiMWA is not shown on the plans but there is the potential for waves of one to three feet in that area. There aren't velocity zone waves, but there is still the potential for wave action and potential refraction. Seawalls can be designed to reduce the refraction to decrease the impact on neighboring properties.

Mr. Shutz said Lobster Cove holds 47 million gallons of water during high tide and the new gravel and seawall raising would displace 10,000 gallons of water. There will be 0.002 inches of water displaced as a result of this project. This information was gathered by a civil engineer working on the project. They will submit additional information to address Commissioner comments and the previous DEP denial.

Co-Chair Jackson moved to continue NOI 028-XXXX 740R Washington Street to the August 19, 2026 meeting; Member Cook seconded and was approved by Members Cook, Sargent, Iliades, and Jackson.

VI. CERTIFICATES OF COMPLIANCE

RCOC 028-2772 498 Washington Street

Mr. Schade said this was before them a couple months ago after the plants were installed. This OOC did not have a condition for a two year monitoring period, but at the time the grass didn't look established or stable. Since then, the grass looks more stable and the newer plants look better. The house is on the market, so they would like to close this out.

Co-Chair Jackson suggested a monitoring condition for a year.

Co-Chair Jackson moved to approve RCOC 028-2772 498 Washington Street; with a continuing condition that plants must be replaced if they fail within the next year. Member Cook seconded and was approved by Members Cook, Sargent, Iliades, Vetere, and Jackson.

RCOC 028-3109 64 Rocky Neck Avenue

Mr. Schade said this project was for the addition of floats on an existing wharf.

TJ Ciarametaro, Five Fathoms Consulting, represented and said the floats have been installed and there are no changes from the OOC.

Co-Chair Jackson moved to approve RCOC 028-3109 64 Rocky Neck Avenue; Member Cook seconded and was approved by Members Cook, Sargent, Iliades, Vetere, and Jackson.

RCOC 028-1933 3 Welch Lane - Ratification of unissued 2016 COC

VII. VIOLATIONS

Violation 17 Landing Road – Unpermitted storage of houseboat on Salt Marsh. James Nicholas and Judy Rose

Judy Rose, 17 Landing Road, represented and said they had to bring the houseboat in from the mooring because they had electrical and sump pump issues. She said the houseboat was anchored and two high tides pushed it on the marsh. They immediately moved it back and tightened up the ropes. There was a personal matter that prevented them from moving it off the marsh on the second incident. She said there was no damage to the marsh.

Mr. Schade said the marsh grass looks a little matted in the areas where the houseboat was on the marsh.

Co-Chair Vetere suggested monitoring of the impacted salt marsh area to determine if restoration needs to occur.

Mr. Schade said he will check on the area in about a month.

EO-24-01 137 Wingaersheek Road Richard A. Nylen, Jr., Esq., Lynch, DeCourcey & Nylen, LLP; Michael DeRosa, DeRosa Environmental Consulting, Inc.

Chip Nylen, Lynch, DeCourcey & Nylen, represented and said they have provided a restoration plan, an as-built plan, and a wetland delineation. The delineation shows the LSCSF and coastal dune on the property. Since the plantings for the Enforcement Order cannot be planted until the Spring, they are proposing to come up with an escrow amount to cover it so the Commission is assured they will go forward with it. He proposed Mike DeRosa and Mr. Schade can come up with the final amount. They would like to resolve the Enforcement Order so they can move forward with a proposal for a boardwalk.

Co-Chair Vetere asked if they have installed a rope or other fence to keep the path width at three feet. They have been asking for this for weeks. He's not sure putting money aside in escrow is necessary to ensure they are complying with the EO.

Mr. Nylen said they have put ropes up, but they've blown down. They are working on ways for it to become permanent. There's been no motorized use of the pathway. There is no condition in the EO that requires them to put fencing to maintain the pathway. Putting money aside was just a sign of good faith from the homeowner.

Member Cook said he would not like to see a new plan until they are in compliance with the EO. The EO should take precedence over the NOI.

Mr. Nylen said they eventually want to put an elevated boardwalk through the pathway and they would like the boardwalk to be five feet wide to accommodate elderly people. He doesn't see the point in restoring a pathway to three feet. They wouldn't put a boardwalk over dune grass as the boardwalk would likely harm or alter the dune grass.

Co-Chair Vetere said the purpose of an elevated walkway would be to allow the dune grass to grow beneath it and lessen the impact to the dune.

Mr. Nylen said they want to do the restoration and boardwalk installation at the same time. They would like to finish out the NOI now so they know how to proceed in the fall with the NOI.

Co-Chair Jackson said they would like to move on from the EO, but in order to do that, they have to comply with the conditions set forth. They have been asking for a demarcation of the three foot path, and they have been consistent in that request. If that had complied, a vehicle couldn't have gone down the path, which has been a continuing violation. She is against the escrow proposal, and would like the EO to stay in place.

Member Iliades said the EO should stay in place.

Member Sargent said they have been having the same discussion for the last year and a half and it's not going anywhere.

Mr. Schade said he does not go against the Commission's wishes, so he is not going to come to an agreement with Mike DeRosa on the escrow amount. There are several issues with the delineation provided. The flood zone is not correct and the extent of the coastal dune is not shown. There was no indication on how the primary frontal dune was delineated, and there needs to be more information on that. There is no indication showing the mapped NHESP maps for Piping Plovers. There are missing and incorrect components. EO's are not a method to approve a delineation, but it is important to correctly show the resource areas. Something needs to be submitted to the DEP as well so they can review it as well.

The Commission requested an ANRAD to approve the delineation onsite.

Mr. Nylen said he will check on the status of the NOI so they don't have to do additional filings and could combine the delineation with the NOI.

William Thibaeult, 137 Wingaersheek, said installing the pilings first would destroy the dune grass. They want to put the Enforcement Order behind them and come to a resolution.

Co-Chair Vetere said they look forward to seeing the area come into compliance.

EO-24-08 Whistlestop Way Anthony Simboli; Michael Schmidt, Goddard Consulting

Mr. Schade said the activities will be resuming soon. They have been out and reflagged all the plantings and things are well established. They will begin invasive species removal and phragmites moving in certain areas. They should be receiving a report on the progress.

Co-Chair Jackson recused.

EO-24-02 227 Atlantic Road (aka 6 Back Shore Place) Anthony Gagliardi

Mr. Schade said they didn't have funds to do the plantings this spring, but they will continue activities in the fall. Everything looks pretty good, but there are a good deal of invasives and some trees in the upland areas aren't doing too well.

Co-Chair Jackson returned.

EO-25-04 145 Atlantic Road Michael DeRosa, DeRosa Environmental Consulting, Inc.

Mr. Schade said there are no updates.

EO-26-01 35 Massasoit Road Joel Favazza, Seaside Legal Solutions, P.C.

Mr. Schade said there are no updates.

VIII. OTHER

Co-Chair Jackson moved to adjourn; Member Sargent seconded and was approved by Members Cook, Sargent, Iliades, Vetere, and Jackson.

Respectfully submitted,

Assistant Conservation Agent Katie Kneeland