Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Beach Access 79 Chase topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee recommends conditional access for exploratory test pits at 79 Chase
Summary
A joint advisory committee recommended the select board allow alternate access (Route 2) for exploratory borings at 79 Chase provided all required notices, neighbor permissions and administrative checks are completed; the recommendation carried on a roll-call vote.
The joint meeting of the Speech Committee and the Speech Management Advisory Committee on Sept. 12 recommended that the select board permit alternate access Route 2 for exploratory test pits at 79 Chase, on the condition that the applicants meet all required notices and administrative requirements.
The chair moved the agenda item to the front so applicants could present. Presenter Brad described the work as a short, two-day field program to evaluate the condition of a vinyl bulkhead and collect subsurface data: "It's a mini excavator, Caterpillar, model 305... about 6 and a half feet wide, weighs about 11,000 pounds," he said, and added the plan calls for six test pits on the beach plus one hand-dug upland pit to support a design analysis. Brad said December 9–10 were target field dates based on low tides.
Committee members focused discussion on access and environmental impacts. Several members urged minimizing disturbance to beach vegetation and confirmed some test pits must occur on town property. Member Dustin (committee member) said the key questions were which route is wider and whether equipment would hit beach grass; he and others volunteered to take site measurements and return that data to the committee. Erin (staff) flagged that applicants must provide certified mailing/assessor receipts and that the town administrator's office will process administrative approvals and any required conservation/permits.
After discussion the committee crafted a conditional recommendation: approve access via Route 2 if all required approvals and notices (including neighbor coordination and certified mail/assessor receipts) are in place; if Route 2 proves infeasible, permit use of Route 1. The committee recorded a roll-call vote and the motion carried with unanimous recorded 'yes' votes from members present. Members asked the applicants to supply the requested proof (postal receipts and measurement photos) before the packet goes to the select board.
The committee emphasized timing: if procedural requirements are not completed before the town's event deadline, the applicants risk delaying non-emergency work until next year. Brad agreed to follow up with the requested documentation and to coordinate with the town administrator's office to expedite the select‑board submission.
The committee's recommendation is procedural (a recommendation to the select board) and does not authorize field work; final permission to use town property rests with the select board and any permitting authorities listed in the town's access-over-town-property policy.
