The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMarasco abutter opposition 3.31, 3.16, and 2.18.2026To Conservation Commission RE 10 Surfside Terrace From Bill Marasco 84 Pleasant abutter Date 3/31/26 I have reviewed the current plan and do no support it as it raises a retaining wall in the V zone and it will cause erosion of two adjacent coastal beaches one public the other soon to be (see appendix) both of which are prohibited by the wetlands by law. For a project to be approved in the V zone it must be less detrimental to abutter not more, and not violate the wetlands act. The petitioner gave two reasons for wanting to raise the retaining wall: to preserve his lawn, and prevent flooding on his lot. The first is not valid because a Cape Cod Lawn is required whenever a lawn is reconstructed in the flood zone. The second is nullified by the petitioner now only wanting to raise the front of the retaining wall which will not eliminate flooding on his property, but instead divert the flood waters (channelize) to the edges of his property and negatively impact the adjacent coastal beaches causing increased erosion. The raising of the retaining wall is prohibited as the bylaw states concerning retaining walls. P 43” And Within the V Zone, in addition to the general performance standards set forth in Section 4.10, (3)(a), the following additional performance standards shall apply: iii. iv. No new construction or footprint expansion of any building or other structure, road, impervious surface, or septic system shall be permitted. No new construction or expansion of any structure that redirects or channelizes floods including retaining walls, fences, and sea walls shall be permitted. “ With respect to coastal beaches. As the bylaw states p 31-32“ Any activity which is allowed on a coastal beach or tidal flat or within 100 feet of a coastal beach or tidal flat shall not have an adverse effect on the coastal beach or tidal flat by: (c) Causing any modification of the beach or downdrift beach that would increase the potential for storm or flood damage; (d) Interfering with the natural movement of the beach or tidal flat; (e) Causing artificial removal of sand from the beach or downdrift beach; Raising the retaining wall, will cause increased erosion which is prohibited. (see diagram below) Also p 42 “Any activity within land subject to coastal storm flowage which will result in the building upon, removing, filling or altering of land shall not have an adverse effect on the interests protected by the bylaw by: . iii. iv. reducing the ability of the land to absorb and contain flood waters; reducing the ability of the land to buffer more inland areas from flooding and wave damage; increasing the elevation or velocity of flood waters, or by redirecting or increasing flows or causing channelization, in each case at the project site, adjacent or nearby properties, or any public or private way.” Raising the retaining will clearly increate the elevation of flood waters and redirect them to the adjacent coastal beaches. The raising of the retaining wall will cause undue erosion on the coastal beaches and therefore is prohibited. (see diagram below) The request for elevation of the retaining wall is purely an aesthetic one, based solely on what the portioner thinks his property should look like. We are all stewards of the wetlands, and the intention of the bylaw was to preserve our coast, and prevent gentrification of the river to suit personal tastes rather than preserve the wetlands for future generations. The petioner has placed a plan forward that maintains the retaining wall at the current level, I support that plan as it complies with the wetlands bylaw and allows for maintenance of current conditions, and no changes to the roadway or park that would cause obstructions, such as additional structures or plantings. If additional height is allowed in the retaining wall, erosion of the coastal beaches will be increased and once this is done they can never be replaced and over 70 years of wetland protection will be lost to the town just to satisfy a personal aesthetic. Here are the specific, detrimental effects on adjacent beaches: • Increased Down-Drift Erosion ("Flanking"):By preventing natural erosion on one property, the wall blocks the supply of sediment that normally replenishes surrounding areas. This causes flanking erosion, where the beach on neighboring properties erodes at an accelerated rate, often leading to the "starvation" of down- drift beaches. • Active Erosion and Scour: The higher the wall, the more wave energy is reflected downward to the base of the structure. This reflected energy scours the sand in front of the wall and on adjacent, unprotected shorelines, often resulting in the permanent loss of the beach and leaving only the hard structure. • Loss of Recreational Beach and Habitats: The increased erosion frequently causes the narrowing or complete disappearance of the sandy beach in front of and adjacent to the wall, particularly at high tide. This destroys coastal habitats for shorebirds and other marine species. • End Effects: When a seawall ends, the wave energy that was reflected along the wall is released, resulting in intensified erosion on the immediate neighboring, unarmored property. • Passive Erosion: By fixing the shoreline in place, the raised wall prevents the beach from migrating inland as sea levels rise, eventually drowning the neighboring beach against the new, high • • Erosion diagram • Appendix Planning board notes Plan no 1794P “The small park is provided so that the people will have rights to use it if the Town ever took this road” from subdivision on plan of Surfside Terrance 1965 town of Yarmouth Planning Board. To Conservation Commission RE 10 Surfside terrace Bill Marasco (84 abbuter) 3/16/27 At your meeting, a criterion that the raising of the retaining wall must not be more detrimental to the wetlands was stated. Based on this criteria and my explanation below, it is clear that the raising of the retaining wall is more detrimental and ought to be denied. If the retaining wall were elevated, it would cause immediate increased erosion, on the adjacent coastal beaches, one public and the other soon to be, during any storm water or tidal elevation event Although the petitioner denied that any erosion of adjacent beaches would result in his presentation, increased erosion would clearly occur. Below is my justification for the denial. I am unable to attend the April 2 nd meeting, and I would ask that it be rescheduled unless, this is not the final meeting before approval of this petition, as I would like to make my comments in public Raising a retaining wall (or seawall) in a flood zone typically protects the immediate property at the expense of adjacent, unprotected beaches. The increased height reflects more wave energy, leading to accelerated erosion (known as active erosion or scouring) directly in front of and down-drift from the structure, often resulting in the loss of the neighboring beach. NPS.gov +4 Here are the specific, detrimental effects on adjacent beaches: • Increased Down-Drift Erosion ("Flanking"):By preventing natural erosion on one property, the wall blocks the supply of sediment that normally replenishes surrounding areas. This causes flanking erosion, where the beach on neighboring properties erodes at an accelerated rate, often leading to the "starvation" of down- drift beaches. • Active Erosion and Scour: The higher the wall, the more wave energy is reflected downward to the base of the structure. This reflected energy scours the sand in front of the wall and on adjacent, unprotected shorelines, often resulting in the permanent loss of the beach and leaving only the hard structure. • Loss of Recreational Beach and Habitats:The increased erosion frequently causes the narrowing or complete disappearance of the sandy beach in front of and adjacent to the wall, particularly at high tide. This destroys coastal habitats for shorebirds and other marine species. • End Effects: When a seawall ends, the wave energy that was reflected along the wall is released, resulting in intensified erosion on the immediate neighboring, unarmored property. • Passive Erosion: By fixing the shoreline in place, the raised wall prevents the beach from migrating inland as sea levels rise, eventually drowning the neighboring beach against the new, high • • Erosion diagram • Matthew S. Furman Email: mfurman@toddweld.com Todd & Weld LLP • Attorneys at Law • One Federal Street, Boston, MA 02110 • T: 617.720.2626 • F: 617.227.5777 • www.todd m February 18, 2026 VIA EMAIL Brittany DiRienzo Conservation Administrator Town of Yarmouth 1146 Route 28 South Yarmouth, MA 02664 bdirienzo@yarmouth.ma.us Re: 10 Surfside Terrace, South Yarmouth Dear Ms. DiRienzo: This firm represents William Marasco (“Dr. Marasco”), the owner of 84 Pleasant Street, a direct abutter to Thomas A. Grimes (“Mr. Grimes”) at the above-referenced property. In advance of the hearing on Mr. Grimes’ proposed alterations to the riverfront portion of his property scheduled for March 2, 2026, I write to make the Commission aware that my client’s property includes appurtenant easement rights in the very area where Mr. Grimes seeks to make his proposed alterations, referred to as a “Park” in the relevant instruments. These rights are a matter of record at the Barnstable County Registry of Deeds and include the following: [T]he perpetual use, easement and right of way over the way shown as Surfside Terrace on [the Subdivision], together with the additional right to use Lot 3 . . . designated as ‘Park’ . . . for reasonable recreational purposes as park areas are generally used, including swimming and bathing, excluding however, any implied right to launch boats (other than boats less than ten feet long which can be launched by hand), or erect structures thereon. Also excluding from the rights herein granted, any implied right to cut or trim shrubbery or trees located within said Lot 3, or otherwise materially alter the present condition thereof. The rights herein granted are to be appurtenant to the Grantees’ lands which abut on the Easterly side of said Surfside Terrace. Copies of the relevant instruments are enclosed, and I additionally note that Dr. Marasco’s easement rights – including those over Mr. Grimes’ property – are the subject of pending litigation in the Massachusetts Land Court in Marasco v. Marasco, Case No. 26 MISC 000065, formerly pending in Barnstable County Superior Court, Civil Action No. 2372 CV 00404. Brittany DiRienzo February 18, 2026 Page 2 of 2 Todd & Weld LLP • Attorneys at Law • One Federal Street, Boston, MA 02110 • T: 617.720.2626 • F: 617.227.5777 • www.todd m Dr. Marasco seeks to be clear with the Commission that, as the owner of easement rights in this precise portion of 10 Surfside Terrace, he opposes the changes to the elevation of the bulkhead and grade of the property. Mr. Grimes was previously granted and moved a structure within the wetlands with the statement that this was the only part of the property that was exposed to flooding, but he now contends that his entire property needs protection by raising the sea wall. This is not true at all. Also, the proposed alterations will change the natural grade of the area and disturb the shoreline unnecessarily. The desire to raise the bulkhead is only to increase the yard of the petitioner and gentrify the shoreline. The only reason to change the grade is for personal aesthetics and is not a legitimate reason to disturb a wetland. Dr. Marasco does, however, support replacement of the seawall as is, as it has been for 70 years with the same grading that existed when Mr. Grimes purchased 10 Surfside Terrace just a few years ago, which will improve the easement area instead of obstructing and interfering with it. Such a reasonable change contrasts with the additions being proposed by Mr. Grimes, which are unnecessary changes to the wetlands and will, inevitably, encourage others to change the wetlands to align with their own personal aesthetics rather than what is good for the preservation of the wetlands, as the bylaw intends. Finally, given that Dr. Marasco believes that Mr. Grimes’ proposals materially interfere with his easement rights and are, therefore, actionable in court, he expressly reserves all rights. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Very truly yours, Matthew S. Furman MFS/rmc Enclosures cc: George J. MacKoul, Esq. 3a 2 0 0 - / Yarkan € 2 Lydian Hs Kleug isa i M, — WO LOLA ANE PAPI FOP PLBOE WLID POUL AAP VCE IPE HUIG FHP ET OBOE AALDTIZO EY UTE PRL SELB FUL AR LCRDOPRN ER POOLE TLE SABE AO PARE ATI SARS LEP? PS RORE PARP BEE FY ERED hip EA, HIT pages SOULE ORIEL: C0, Pe NWA oO “sl fae te ZZ ae VUEET ane K MAIS, PEPE! CA TEID YL fp TLCCIO” THM IPD EL AE _PDLUOLED TL ST PIAS LOBOS Bf FEL SFI, ft, SPPEEL ELD ORL PEERED LED DI- FPLAS MOS GF. kr Me abl O. FEMAP ALOK POECLIIOT ¢PAAEP eee, AA SAPP bees . ME b | | 8 | Ny 5 nN |, 22g A N i sf Ig N Ne ‘i |‘ N s i % ! ch }Q | ee ee N49 » a PMRAOE M ‘i WHA SE es BS zeae nena TN [5 ifr \ “Ly NEN : x TAS ya a rehe IN Yo ' N 1 \Q % Hohl OL QD, cannes mre aan sae hae OEP LS PELL RE OURS FPL SELVA TPO LEIS POLE PREF LE FU AL L E N CO L E PL ' Z. PUbOres . I FO PP LOMELOE a a i & Lah! eo of zg eo Pe AP R IS ” —— SOBLYLRI ONS ADA < Oe” hv P AA (300TH) PRON OL ID, Ate PSS SOM AES AABIELL EN HE AARELAL eur ff gos Fevpeat AF” Pram \Seovk 200 Foo | \- ° 9 0 f . 3a 2 0 0 - / Yarkan € 2 Lydian Hs Kleug isa i M, — WO LOLA ANE PAPI FOP PLBOE WLID POUL AAP VCE IPE HUIG FHP ET OBOE AALDTIZO EY UTE PRL SELB FUL AR LCRDOPRN ER POOLE TLE SABE AO PARE ATI SARS LEP? PS RORE PARP BEE FY ERED hip EA, HIT pages SOULE ORIEL: C0, Pe NWA oO “sl fae te ZZ ae VUEET ane K MAIS, PEPE! CA TEID YL fp TLCCIO” THM IPD EL AE _PDLUOLED TL ST PIAS LOBOS Bf FEL SFI, ft, SPPEEL ELD ORL PEERED LED DI- FPLAS MOS GF. kr Me abl O. FEMAP ALOK POECLIIOT ¢PAAEP eee, AA SAPP bees . ME b | | 8 | Ny 5 nN |, 22g A N i sf Ig N Ne ‘i |‘ N s i % ! ch }Q | ee ee N49 » a PMRAOE M ‘i WHA SE es BS zeae nena TN [5 ifr \ “Ly NEN : x TAS ya a rehe IN Yo ' N 1 \Q % Hohl OL QD, cannes mre aan sae hae OEP LS PELL RE OURS FPL SELVA TPO LEIS POLE PREF LE FU AL L E N CO L E PL ' Z. PUbOres . I FO PP LOMELOE a a i & Lah! eo of zg eo Pe AP R IS ” —— SOBLYLRI ONS ADA < Oe” hv P AA (300TH) PRON OL ID, Ate PSS SOM AES AABIELL EN HE AARELAL eur ff gos Fevpeat AF” Pram \Seovk 200 Foo | \- ° 9 0 f . 䑡瑥⁆楬敤‱ㄯ㌯㈰㈵‴㨴㈠偍 were SUBDIVISION PLAN OF LAND IN YARMOUTH Meroer Engineering Corp., Surveyors 13870, my ‘ * ea e ord “4 July 8, 1965 August 25, 1967 PLEASANT G@oeeenie ST. NIOTSTP IONE . PBF LOR NI°O8' BO'L 250 a £86.60 — ISS.939 ee) - : fa. iN) N) m y| S| § i i a2) ~ q : ES ’ AB mar We QO fe 5 row ike : ‘ 7a} G z J § at, Lj roa ’ by o Tm a 2 XQ B i] ‘3 Q 4 Z & 9 ¢ {8 a ~ t, ~s~ g co S| 7S porate OAK G ; W/ =——\K Ortes! Subdivision of Land Shown on Plan 1387 Filed with Cert. of Title No. 2215 Registry District of Barnstable County be issued for land Separate certificates of title me shown hereon as 1.0 Ss Lees na neeaaeetenceess By the Court. Recordé? Detsril-NoScale | | ei Cony of part of slons{iae708® | LAND REGISTRATION OFFICE Scale of this} BEERS to an inch CM. Anderson, Engineer for Court ¥4 were SUBDIVISION PLAN OF LAND IN YARMOUTH Meroer Engineering Corp., Surveyors 13870, my ‘ * ea e ord “4 July 8, 1965 August 25, 1967 PLEASANT G@oeeenie ST. NIOTSTP IONE . PBF LOR NI°O8' BO'L 250 a £86.60 — ISS.939 ee) - : fa. iN) N) m y| S| § i i a2) ~ q : ES ’ AB mar We QO fe 5 row ike : ‘ 7a} G z J § at, Lj roa ’ by o Tm a 2 XQ B i] ‘3 Q 4 Z & 9 ¢ {8 a ~ t, ~s~ g co S| 7S porate OAK G ; W/ =——\K Ortes! Subdivision of Land Shown on Plan 1387 Filed with Cert. of Title No. 2215 Registry District of Barnstable County be issued for land Separate certificates of title me shown hereon as 1.0 Ss Lees na neeaaeetenceess By the Court. Recordé? Detsril-NoScale | | ei Cony of part of slons{iae708® | LAND REGISTRATION OFFICE Scale of this} BEERS to an inch CM. Anderson, Engineer for Court ¥4 䑡瑥⁆楬敤‱ㄯ㌯㈰㈵‴㨴㈠偍 Date Filed 11/3/2025 4:42 PM Superior Court - Barnstable Docket Number 2372CV00404 5000-2327 pace NOT NoT A_N oN TCIAL OFFICIAL OFEOEY COPY NOT IAL OF EGE Y COPY EASEMENT GRANT GPE af We, BRUCE K. HEICK and THELMA L. HEICK, husband and wife, both of Yarmouth (South), Barnatable County, Massachusetts, grant to JOHN F, MARTIN and KATHLEEN V. MARTIN, husband and wife, both of Yarmouth (South), Barnstable county, Massachusetts, and to PATRICK V. MARASCO and ROSE MARIE MARASCO, husband and wife, both of Andover, Middlesex County, Massachusette, the perpetual right, use and easement of way over the way shown as Surfside Terrace on a plan entitled "Subdivision Plan of Land in (South) Yarmouth, Mass. for John F. and Kathleen V. Martin, Scale 1"=30' July 8, 1965 Mercer Engineering Corp. South Yarmouth, Mass.", being a Subdivision of Plan for Richard J. Stevens recorded in Plan Book 164, Page 115, at the Barnstable County Registry of Deeds, as appurtenant to the grantee's land abutting o8td HAY: Witness our hands and seals this w&?°— day epee 1966. i eee 2 AK. Leek Bruce K. Heick me bce x Mace Thelma L. Heick The Commonwealth of Massachusetts NOAFOLK Bampeenied-a , SS. wy rn, 1966. Then personally appeared the above-named Bruce K. Heick and Thelma L. Heick and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be their free act and deed, before me neg Te THOM: ye CU : “, 1206 my Sbfimission expires dumesOdquneer 193 RECDFEB 1 8 IS6GAND RECORDED 5000-2327 pace A_N oN TCIAL OFFICIAL OFEOEY COPY NOT IAL OF EGE Y COPY EASEMENT GRANT HPO af We, BRUCE K. HEICK and THELMA L. HEICK, husband and wife, both of Yarmouth (South), Barnatable County, Massachusetts, grant to JOHN F, MARTIN and KATHLEEN V. MARTIN, husband and wife, both of Yarmouth (South), Barnstable county, Massachusetts, and to PATRICK V. MARASCO and ROSE MARIE MARASCO, husband and wife, both of Andover, Middlesex County, Massachusette, the perpetual right, use and easement of way over the way shown as Surfside Terrace on a plan entitled "Subdivision Plan of Land in (South) Yarmouth, Mass. for John F. and Kathleen V. Martin, Scale 1"=30' July 8, 1965 Mercer Engineering Corp. South Yarmouth, Mass.", being a Subdivision of Plan for Richard J. Stevens recorded in Plan Book 164, Page 115, at the Barnstable County Registry of Deeds, as appurtenant to the grantee's land abutting o8td HAY: Witness our hands and seals this w&?°— day epee 1966. (dace ee AK. Leek Bruce K. Heick me bce x Mace Thelma L. Heick The Commonwealth of Massachusetts NONFOLK Bampeenied-a , SS. wy rn, 1966. Then personally appeared the above-named Bruce K. Heick and Thelma L. Heick and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be their free act and deed, before me J bons 4 Ort rthh neg Te THOM: ye CU : “, 1206 my Sbfimission expires dumesOdquneer 193 RECDFEB 1 8 IS6GAND RECORDED 䑡瑥⁆楬敤‱ㄯ㌯㈰㈵‴㨴㈠偍 Date Filed 11/3/2025 4:42 PM Superior Court - Barnstable Docket Number 2372CV00404 eee NOT. NogT i AN OFFICIAL OFFICIAL Cc Y COPY NOT NOT 300°1327 race} 194 OFFICIAL OFFICIAL COPY COPY EASEMENT GRANT nee We, JOHN F. MARTIN and KATHLEEN V. MARTIN, husband and wife, both of Yarmouth (South), Barnstable County, Massachusetts, grant to PATRICK V. MARASCO and ROSE MARIE MARASCO, husband and + ne e e r t e e r m n s e s wife, both of Andover, Middlesex County, Massachusetts, the per- petual right, use and easement of way over the way shown as Surf~ side Terrace on a plan entitled "Subdivision Plan of Land in (South) Yarmouth, Mass. for John F. and Kathleen V. Martin, Scale 1"=30' July 9, 1965 Mercer Engineering Corp. South Yarmouth, Mass.", being a Subdivision of Plan for Richard J. Stevens re- corded in Plan Book 164, Page 115, at the Barnstable County Registry of Deeds; with the additional right to use the area designated as “Park" on Lot 3A as shown on said plan, for all pur- poses for which park areas are generally used, including boating, bathing and general recreational purposes, all as appurtenant to the grantee's land abutting said way. Witness our hands and seals this #/;7 day of Tauuany ph F. Martin Kathleen V. Martin 1966. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Barnstable, os. , 1966 Vaniaay 3s Then personally appeared the above-named John F. Martin and Kathleen V. Martin and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be their free act and deed, before me RECDFEB 1 8 IS6GAND RECORDED + ne e e r t e e r m n s e s snor2 S27 Pact AN OFFICIAL OFFICIAL Cc Y COPY NOT NOT 194 OFFICIAL OFFICIAL COPY COPY EASEMENT GRANT nee We, JOHN F. MARTIN and KATHLEEN V. MARTIN, husband and wife, both of Yarmouth (South), Barnstable County, Massachusetts, grant to PATRICK V. MARASCO and ROSE MARIE MARASCO, husband and wife, both of Andover, Middlesex County, Massachusetts, the per- petual right, use and easement of way over the way shown as Surf~ side Terrace on a plan entitled "Subdivision Plan of Land in (South) Yarmouth, Mass. for John F. and Kathleen V. Martin, Scale 1"=30' July 9, 1965 Mercer Engineering Corp. South Yarmouth, Mass.", being a Subdivision of Plan for Richard J. Stevens re- corded in Plan Book 164, Page 115, at the Barnstable County Registry of Deeds; with the additional right to use the area designated as “Park" on Lot 3A as shown on said plan, for all pur- poses for which park areas are generally used, including boating, bathing and general recreational purposes, all as appurtenant to the grantee's land abutting said way. Witness our hands and seals this #/;7 day of Tauuany ph F. Martin Kathleen V. Martin 1966. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Barnstable, os. , 1966 Vaniaay 3s Then personally appeared the above-named John F. Martin and Kathleen V. Martin and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be their free act and deed, before me RECDFEB 1 8 IS6GAND RECORDED 䑡瑥⁆楬敤‱ㄯ㌯㈰㈵‴㨴㈠偍 EASEMENT GRANT In considgyation, of having been granted | or rights in Surfside Tenrace: aA sown on a plan entitled oBypajg/ision Plan of Land in (sopehg, Yraputh, Lyassachusctt® fr Gok: i. RL Kathleen V. Martin" dated July 8, 1965 by Mercer cogincering Corp. recorded in parnstableangg?stzy of Deeds in Plan Bg? ado, Page 1, and filed with? the fank & Gute As Igupdivisior® pRa&k #I38¢CH, By Lhe | Grantees hereunder, such * tants being more particulsrly sot forth in two instruments, one by Bruce K. and Thelma L. Heick, dated January 22, 1966, recorded in said Deeds, Book 1327, Page 193 and the other by John F. and Kathleen V. Martin dated January 31, 964, recorded in said Deeds, Book 1327, Page 194, we, PATRICK ¥. MARASCO and ROSE MARIE MARASCO ; husband and wife, both of Andover, Essex Gounty, Massachusetts, grant to RRUCE K, HEICK and THELNA L. BEICK, husband and wife, both of Wellesley, Norfolk County, Massa-, 1 chusetts, and JOHN F. MARTIN and KATHLEEN V. MARTIN, husband and ' wife, both of Yarmouth (South), Barnstable County, Massachusetts, ' the perpetual use, easement and right of way over the way shown as Surfside Terrace on said plan hereinabove mentioned, together with the additional right to use Lot 3, the arca containing 420 square feet of land more or less, and designated as "Park" on @ plan entitled "Supplementary Plan of Land in (South) Yarmouth, Massachusetts, being a revision of Lots #2 & 3 shown on Land Court plan #173870R" dated August 25, 1967 by Mercer Engineering Corp.» for reasonablic recreational purposes as park arcas are generally used, including swimming and bathing, excluding however, any implied right to Jaunch boats (other than poats less than ten feet long which can pe jaunched by hand), oF erect structures thereon. Also excluding from the rights herein granted, ny implied right to cut or trim shrubbery or trees located within said Let 3, or 䑡瑥⁆楬敤‱ㄯ㌯㈰㈵‴㨴㈠偍 Date Filed 11/3/2025 4:42 PM Superior Court - sre , bs ia Tay a en parear Docket Number 2372CV06404 , ce — se vide eete in tee | |. . otherwise materially alter the prernent condition thereof, ‘The 1 rights herein granted Mr® td be appurtenant to the dkehieds! landg which abut on te Pagterlysige pofy said Surfsgdqr Terracg T A | For the cfanPor?s Yitie, see Certificat’ of Titte No. ! 35304 on file in the Bqrigstable Registry District iNRG@®idtration AN AN Book 276, Page Wa TOTAL OFFICIAL WITNESS ov Mans ¥nd seals this (7 Ca Br GY 1968. WE Patrick VY. Marasco Low Jarre Feta 20.1 Rose Marie Marasco. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS | NORFOLK » 8s. Chef £ 1968 | Then personally appeared the above named Patrick V. ; Marasce and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be his free act and deed, hefore me, jn. SE] ! OD gt | | Notary/Publicj My commission expires: Gel’. 1990 ie n e ; Marasce and acknowledged the foregoing instrument to be his free pier rae a fete ete aerial eedb een eee ee | otherwise materially alter the prernent condition thereof, ‘The rights herein granted Nr@ t2 ve appurtenant to the MbeMess' lanag which abut on the Pagter sige Pefysaid Surfsgdagr cprrecas IA | For the cfanPor?s Yitie, see Certificat’ of Titte No. ! 35304 on file in the Bqrigstable Registry District iNRG@®idtration AN AN Book 276, Page Wa TOTAL OFFICIAL WITNESS ov Mans ¥nd seals this (7 Ca Br GY 1968. btitd 2 Patrick VY. Marasco Low Jarre Feta 20.1 Rose Marie Marasco. COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS | NORFOLK » 8s. Chef £ 1968 | Then personally appeared the above named Patrick V. act and deed, hefore me, An. a Notary/Public i My commission expires: Gel’. 1990 : 䑡瑥⁆楬敤‱ㄯ㌯㈰㈵‴㨴㈠偍