Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the ConCom Template topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Coastal resilience advisory committee approves ConCom review template, adds Chapter 91 public-access note
Summary
The Coastal Resilience Advisory Committee unanimously approved a template for reviewing Conservation Commission applications and directed staff to do initial evaluations; members added a recommendation to flag Chapter 91 public-access requirements in the template.
The Coastal Resilience Advisory Committee voted Jan. 13 to adopt a standardized template for evaluating Conservation Commission (ConCom) application-review requests and asked staff to perform the initial assessments. The motion to approve the template, amended to include a reminder about Chapter 91 public-access obligations, passed on a roll-call vote.
Chair Peter opened discussion by asking members if anyone had edits to the packet. Sarah Boyce asked whether committee members were expected to follow external links and gather data individually for items in the template or if staff would do an initial pass. "I think if Leah or town staff are going to be taking a first stab at it, then that makes sense," Boyce said, adding that presenting the same information to all reviewers would make committee evaluation more consistent.
Leah Hill, the town’s coastal resilience coordinator, said the template is intended as a "starting point" for discussion and that the town hopes to implement a protocol where staff conduct initial evaluations and bring items to CRAC for review "if I need, like, a second opinion, then bring it forward to CRAC." Matt Fee asked that under item 8 the template explicitly note requirements for public access under Chapter 91, saying: "public access is required under Chapter 91 that we should have some sort of comment if they are fixing their bulkhead..."
Sarah Boyce moved to approve the template with Matt Fee’s public-access edits; Doug Rose seconded. The committee recorded unanimous ayes in a roll-call vote. The chair said staff would incorporate the committee’s discussion into guidance and proceed to use the template as intended.
The committee framed the vote as procedural: approving a consistent review tool and clarifying who will perform the initial data collection rather than adopting new policy. Members asked staff to translate CRAC’s points into a letter or form that the Conservation Commission can use when reviewing applications.
