Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Seawall topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Conservation commission approves 1‑foot seawall height increase and strict long‑term conditions for 18 Boardman
Summary
The Manchester Conservation Commission voted unanimously to approve an order of conditions for repairs and a one‑foot raise to an existing seawall at 18 Boardman, imposing perpetual restrictions on pesticide use, deicing, hazardous-material storage and deed‑recorded acknowledgements; the decision follows an alternatives analysis presented by the applicant’s team.
The Manchester Conservation Commission voted to approve an order of conditions for a revised seawall project at 18 Boardman, authorizing a one‑foot increase in the existing wall’s finished height and placing several perpetual restrictions on the property.
The commission’s action follows a continued hearing in which attorney Jamie Buchanan Medea and Jordan Folds of DeRoz Environmental presented revised plans and an alternatives analysis that reduced the originally proposed two‑foot raise to a one‑foot increase, removed proposed fill and eliminated tree wells. The team added the existing septic and leaching‑field location to the plans after questions from commissioners.
Why it matters: Commissioners said the changes reduce the project’s footprint while addressing coastal erosion and reducing the risk that storm surge will compromise the on‑site septic system. The vote allows the homeowner to proceed under a set of conditions intended to protect adjoining coastal resources and to ensure future owners are aware of wetland restrictions.
Jordan Folds, the project consultant, summarized the alternatives: “We looked at underground drainage, a two‑foot raise with fill, coir/core logs, and no action — the subsurface drainage would have disturbed around 5,000 square feet and cost roughly three times the proposed project,” he said, and added that the one‑foot option avoids additional fill behind the wall and shows the septic system on the plan.
Attorney Jamie Buchanan Medea told the commission the proposal “respects the Coastal Zone Management Handbook” and argued the one‑foot raise represented a compromise that minimizes wetland impacts while protecting the septic system. Medea and Jordan also argued the core‑log alternative would require frequent replacement and greater disturbance.
The commission’s written special and perpetual conditions include a permanent ban on pesticides and herbicides in wetland buffers, limits on deicing chemical use to the minimum necessary for public safety, requirements to store hazardous materials above FEMA flood elevations, a deed‑recorded obligation that future owners acknowledge wetland restrictions, and other construction sequencing and mitigation requirements. The chair noted DEP’s earlier concern that the coastal bank plays a role in beach nourishment and that the record must show the project does not worsen offshore sediment dynamics.
Outcome and next steps: The motion to close the hearing and to approve the order of conditions was moved and seconded; the commission recorded the approval as unanimous among voting members present. The applicant team thanked staff and commissioners for their review. The work is now authorized to proceed subject to the conditions and any required state approvals.
Authorities cited in the hearing included the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act and the town’s Wetlands Bylaw procedures for orders of conditions. The commission will monitor compliance through its certificate of compliance and deed recording requirements.
