HomeMy WebLinkAboutNarrative 5.6.2026Notice of Intent
Blue Rock Road Realty Trust and Mark Stoever, 166 &. 172 Blue lock Road, South Yarmouth
Performance Standards Narrative, Alternatives Analysis, and Construction Protocol
Property C scriptWo
The property is located on the Bass River; a tidal river on Nantucket sound. The project site is approximately 3.6
miles inland from Nantucket Sound. Them is a single-family dwelling at the top of the hank that was built in 1970
(assessor's records). The property is located on the western shore of the Bass River_ There is no salt marsh fronting
the property. There is a marginal beach at law tide. There is no high tide beach. The tidal current in this section of
the river "The Narrows", is quite swift. The site has a very tall and steep coastal frank, with existing access stairs
consisting of several stair runs and landings. The last set of stairs to the beach have Failed and need to be re -secured
to the landing and properly supported on the beach. The entire staircase needs repair and replacement_ There is a
completely failed bulkhead in two places along the shoreline that is completely unusable and needs to be replaced
with a proper bulkhead, The stairs and landings need to be re -designed to allow for a consistent rise and run for the
stairs and relocate the landings so they are more even down the s[ope, The coastal bank is well vegetated and stable.
with the exception of two areas on the north and south ends of the property. There is an existing bulkhead directly
south which stops 15 feet from the south property line where fiber rolls were installed up to the property line. The
fiber rolls are still there. but are in need of repairs aswe] I_
Existing Permitting
The original bulkhead appears to have been constructed without a permit. A Notice of Intent was filed in 1985. and
the order was denied under SE83-646, issued in December of 1985, The denial was only Kasen on the type ofengineer
Used for the filing (Chemical ors. Civil), and was deemed to be an improper filing_ There is also an Interim Approval
chapter 91 license 4022 issued in 1994 for the stairs, bulkhead and a dock_ This license has since expired. A blurry
1995 Google Earth aerial shows something in the water in front efthe property, but there wasn't anything in the
water when the owners bought the property in 2001. An order of conditions (SE83-2017) "w issued in 20 15 for a
garage addition. T7re stairs and bulkhead are shown on the plan of record for this order. A certificate ofcompliance
is being sought by Down Cape Engineering for this order_ There was another order (SE83-2107) issued in 2017 for
a fiber roll array across the entire property frofflage, wd a slight reconfiguration of the lower landing and stairs to
the beach. According to the owner, this work was never started, A certificate of compliance is being sought by Down
Cape Engineering for this order. The applicant far this project is the Blue Rock Road Fealty Trust, with Mark Stoever
as an additional property owner with the bulkhead extension work continuing onto his property. Two signature sheets
are included in the NO for this purpose,
Project Description — Proposed Work
The purpose of the project is to obtain an order of conditions to first make temporary repairs to the lowest landing
and access stairs to the beach for the summer of 2026, and then full} reconstruct and reconfigure the existing access
stairs, remove the timber bulkhead remains and reconstruct a vinyl bulkhead along the waterfront in the fall or winter
of 2026. A new lower landing will be constructed on top of the new bulkhead that will overhang the bulkhead by 3.5
feet to provide support for new stairs to the beach- The bulkhead will be extended to within 15 feet of the property
line and then turn landward at an angle and extend into the bank_ Fiber rolls will be placed along the north return to
soften any end effects and transition energy to the property to the north. This is exactly what wa& done for the Stoever
property to the south. The bulkhead is proposed to be at the same height as the Stoever bulkhead for Continuity and
slope protection.
The new bulkhead will extend south to the Fedele (applicant) property line, with a. 00-degree return into the bank.
The bulkhead will then extend further south to meet the existing bulkhead an the Stoever property. This new portion
of the bulkhead will be properly anchored and will be self`supjwfing. The sheeting will extend to connect to the
toever bulkhead, but will only be a "cosmetic" connection, not structural. Both bulkheads wilt remain independently
anchored and supported. The new bulkhead will be located approximately where the most landward timber bulkhead
remains are located now and then extend as close to the bank as possible along the shoreline. However, enough
clearance must remain between the bulkhead and the bank bottom to facilitate f{]ling behind the bulkhead at a stable
angle. Tlie fill will then be stabilized with jute matting and planted with plants from the planting list and allowed to
stabilize. Temporary irrigation is proposed for two growing seasons to help establish the plantings.
Page I of 5
Notice of latent
Blue bock Road Realty Trust and Mark Stoever, 166 & 172 Blue Rock road, South Yarmouth
Access for this project will be almost entirely from the outer. The piles and bulkhead will have to be installed solely
from a working barge. The stairs and framing can be accomplished frorn the upland once the piles and heavy timbers
and anchors are installed. The working barge will likely remain on site to provide storage of equipment and materials.
Shellfish Survey
A shellfish survey was perfarmed by John Lowell on November 20, 2025 and the results are shown in his report_
The report indicates .the species, sizes, and densities of existing shellfish in the area. A copy of the survey report is
included with this f ling. ApprOximately 40 plots were surveyed, with shellfish found in 10 plots (25%). There were
approx]mately 2 shellfish found in transect A, 8 in transect B, 6 in tmnsect C, 0 im transect D, for a total of 16 shellfish
found i n approx imately 2' x2' x4p (160) sy uare feet of plots; a dens ity of approximately 0.4 shel I fi sh per plot, and Q_ 1
shellfish per square foot (of the plots). Refer to the report for more specific information.
Navigation
The location of the proposed reconstructed bulkhead is within the existing footprint, with no seaward expansion
proposed. Therefore. no change or negative impact to navigation is anticipated with the bulkhead reconstruction.
The project will be reviewed by the Waterways Committed in March, and the results of that meeting will be available
to the commission by the NOI hearing.
Alternatives Analysis For The Riverfront Area (Discussion of Options)
The proposed project reconstructs existing access stairs and landings and protects the coastal bank from erosion for
minor flooding events. The project helps to prevent the introduction of unwanted sediments into an area of the river
that is shallow with a swift current. The project also restores tyro areas of the coastal bank that have been eroding.
As such, the following analysis is offered to describe the available optloms for this project_
Option I - Do nothing
Ifnothing is done at this site, the bulkhead would continue to deteriorate, and pieces would break offand become a
hazard to navigation. The bank would continue to erode, causing the lower landing to fail completely, and the erosion
would continue up the bank slope, further destabilizing the slope. The upper portion of the existing stairs, while
functioning, would also continue to deteriorate. The lowest stair access is unsafe now and will only get worse with
time. Temporary repairs are required just to make the stairs usable for the 2026 season. Further, continued erosion
into this portion of the waterway means that sediments will be carried away by the swift current and will deposit the
sand either down river where the river widens, or upriver by the bike path bridge where the river is wider. This will
continue to At in the river and make boating navigation more difficult. Personal boating experience indicates that it
is very shallow under the bike path bridge, and the channel south of The Narrows continues to move west towards
private property and existing docks, Continued introduction of sediments from eroding banks and beaches in the area
will only exacerbate the issue and make boating transit more difficult in these areas. For this and many safety reasons,
the "do nothing" option is unsafe, threatens further destabilization of the coastal bank, and has the potential for
negative impacts up and dawn the river. Therefore, this option is not the desired option.
Option 2 - Locate the bulkhead further seaward.
This option "m discussed. If the bulkhead is placed more seaward, then angle of the fill would be less, promoting a
more stable slope. However, the bulkhead would extend further onto the beach, reducing its size, which is unwanted_
The quantity of fill required would be more. Therefore, this option was not chosen.
Option 3 — Construct the bulkhead at a lower height than designed, with fiber rolls on top.
This option leaves a lower bulkhead height and would require transition ing from the higher Stoever bulkhead to the
new lower bulkhead. In addition, if the bulkhead was lower, it would require placing it more seaward so that the fill
would be applied at an angle that can remain stable (see option 2 above). If the bulkhead was lowered and placed
directly at the base of the coastal bank, the slope above would be too steep to fill and plant, resulting in more erosion.
This option would also reduce the area of coastal beach. Therefore, this option was not chosen.
Page 2 of 5
Notice, of Intent
Blue beck Read Realty Trust and Mark Stoever, 166 & 172 Blue Rock Road, South Yarmouth
Option 4 —Construct the bulkhead entirely from the land
This option would require the use of crane in the driveway, more than 190 feet away from the furthest portion of
the bulkhead. if a large enough crane can be positioned, it would have to span over the house. In addition, there are
likely trees on the bank that would be in the way of lowering the sheeting to the site. For example, 20-foot sheets
with a vibrating heal require more than 30 feet of clear vertical clearance_ Visibility for crane control could only be
with remote Control or radios, since the operator can't see the bank below_ This option would be expensive and is
not practical and therefore was not chosen.
OPTION 5, Utilize fiber rolls or other "soft: solution" along the entire bank bottom instead of the bulkhead.
The Narrows is an urea of high velocity for the tidal currents. The applicant's property is directly in the narrows.
where the river is at its narrowest point. The current is swift during the tidal runs, exceeding 6 knots (as measured
from my boat). I addition, boas transiting up current at higher tides will produce a wake that reaches up into the
fiber rolls at high tide. Fiber rolls are not designed to withstand direct wave energy and not really designed to get
wet_ It would be aG waste of time and money to install asoft solution in such a high velocity area.
Further consideration should be given to the fact that when these types of installations fail. the bank can fail more,
and the beach and bank have to be disturbed again; either for maintenance or reconstruction. Equipment is needed
on the beach for this type of i astall ati on. For the proposed project the bulkhead can be constructed from the water
with no equipment on the beach_ In this way the beach is not disturbed during the instal lation of the bulkhead, which
is more desirable for the environment than repealed disturbances for maintenance and reconstruction of a .soft:
solution. There is no way a soft solution will work in this location, and that is why this option was never considered
viable for this location in this filing.
OPTION 6; Instaill arock revetmentat this Imation_ The installation of rock revetment at this location was also not
considered a viable option because a revetment kw0uld take up too much area on the beach and require deep
excavation into the beach in an area of high currents. T'hm is only a small space at loin tide line to allow excavation
deep enough to install toe stones. All of the beach would have to be excavated, and there would be no high tide beach
once the revetment was installed. in addition, the logistics of getting the racks to this location, in a barge small
enough to transit under either of the two bridges, with a barge large enough to hold an excavator, is simply not
feasible at this location, For this and many reasons, a rock revetment was not considered a viable option for this site.
Option 7 — Project as proposed
This option baGlanm the ability to stabilize the bank and provide protection for a pre-1973 dwelling, keep as much
coastal beach as possible, and provide continuity from the adjacent bulkhead_ The top of the bulkhead will be at
elevation 65', which is well below the flood elevation of 1 1'. This wi11 allow the bulkhead to continue to provide a
sediment source for the coastal beach in storm events while protecting the slope and the dwelling. For this stretch of
Bass River, the current is very swift, The proposed project balances the functions of the coastal bank and coastal
beach while limiting the amount of sediments introduced into the river and helps to maintainnavigation.
Performance Stondairds
The project proposes the reconstruction of the existing access steps, a bulkhead, and landings. T1ie areas affected by
the project include Riverfront Area, Coastal Bank, and Coastal Beach, and potentially Land Containing Shellfish.
Each resource area is addressed below separately. The project as proposed will not have -any significant adverse
effects to the surrounding resource areas.
Riverfront Area -
There is bath I00-foot and 2004004 riverfront area buffer zones an this property. The work in the 0-100 riverfront
area is limited to the reomsiruetion of the existing stairs and landings, and the restoration and planting of the bank
slope. ?done of this .work will impact the riverfront area itself. full restoration of the access path will keep the bank
riverfront area stable and well vegetated- Plea_w refer to the discussion of project alternative stated previously in this
narrative,
Page 3 of 5
Notice of lntent
Blue lock road Realty Trust and [dark Stoever, 166 & 172 Blue Rock Road, South Yarmouth
Coastal Bank - The area of work over the coastal bank extends from the base of the coastal bank to the top of the
bank for the stairs and landings, and then along the bottom of the bank for the bulkhead. Most of the bank slope is
stable with the exception oftwoareas which are proposed to be re -stabilized and planted. The erosion on the bottom
of the batik will require approximately 200 +1- cubic yards of f I I to fil I in behind the bulkhead up to rneet the ex i sti ng
erosion to restore and stabilize the hank. The work in this area is limited to the re -construction of the bulkhead.
existing acss stairs and the placement of fill. The project will be conditioned to prevent negative impacts to the
bank_ No negative impacts are anticipated. In fact, the bank will be improved because of the restoration and
stabilization. Therefore, the project as proposed can be permitted under 310 CM 10.30 (6) through (8).
Under the Yarmouth Wetlands bylaw, Section 2,05(3)a-2, there is no other method of protecting the bank and the
dwelling other than a proposed coastal engineered structure. This is because soft solution will not work in this
location due to high current velocities and boat wakes. Please refer to Option 5 above for soft solutions as discussed
for this location. Further, this is an area that is silting in from coastal bank erosion and now requires dredging to
maintain sufl icient depths for boat passage. Continued silting in from erosion w i I l occur if a soft solution fails at this
location. Therefore, only a coastal engineered structural solution should be used in this location_ The project as
proposed wiII stabilize the bank and prevent further siltation into the channel. while the eroding bank provides some
sediment to the downdrift beaches, {s negative impact in this area), it is the opinion of Shorefront Consulting that
this introduction of sediment is not significant (significant is riot quantified in the regulations) at this time_ if the
bank erodes to a point where "slippage" starts to occur, then large amounts cfsediment would be introduced into the
river, which would be undesirable. Therefore, the project as proposed can be permitted under 310 CM R 10.30 (6)
through (8), and the Yarmouth Wetlands bylaw, section 2.05(3)a-2.
Coastal Beach - The ma of coastal beach varies along the shoreline and extends approximately 10-15 feet frorn the
bottorn afthe bank slope to MLW. The proposed bulkhead re -construction is designed to place the bulkhead against
the bottom of the bank slope. preserving the beach_ The bulkhead is lava enough in height so that sediments can be
taken during storm events to nourish the reach and still allow minor repairs to the eroded bank slope if needed. As
previously stated though, excessive sediments into the river will have negative effects up and down the river. The
reconstruction will not change the role For the beach in storm damage prevention, flood control, or protection, of
wildlife habitat. The existing configuration will also not change the volume or form of the beach sediments. The
configuration will also not change the ability of the beach to respond to wave action, or the effect for any dondrift
beach. The bulkhead as designed will have no adverse impacts to the coastal beach and therefore meets the
performance standards for work on a Coastal leach_ Therefore, the project as proposed can be permitted under 310
CMR 10.27 (1) through (7).
Land Containing Shellfish — There were no shellfish found in the proposed footprint of the bulkhead. Shellfish
were found on the beach, and this area will not be changed or impacted by the bulkhead construction. Any shellfish
fronting the existing bulkhead should not be disturbed during construction. The bulkhead will be entirely removed
and reconstructed in sections. The project a1w includes construction protocols to minimize grounding_ The project
as proposed eliminates any impacts to this resource, and will have no negative effects on the fallowing interests:
(a) alterations of water circulation;
(b) alterations in relief elevation;
(c) the oompaoting ofsediment by vehicular traffic;
(d) alterations in the distribution of sediment grain size;
(e) alteratiom in natural drainage from adjacent land; or
(f) -changes in water quality, including, but not limited to, other than natural fluctuations in
the levcls of salinity, dissolved oxygen, nutrients, temperature or turbidity, -Dr the addition of pollutants.
By fallowing these proper design and construction protocols, the project can be permitted as proposed without
negative impacts to the shellfish resource and in accordance with 310 CM R 1034 (4),
Pagtr 4 of 5
Notice of Intent
Slue hock Road Realty Trust and dark Stoover, 166 & 172 Slue Rock Road, South Yarmouth
CON(iTRUCT]ON PROTOCOL
The staging area for materials swill be on the applicant's property (driveway) and a working barge. The work area
shall be kept to a minimum, All equipment shall be stored on the applicant's property or on a working barge when
not in use. Any refuse material shall be kept on the working barge or removed from the coastal bank daily. No
materials of any kind are to be stoned on the coastal bank, The working barge shall be positioned so as to prevent
grounding, and stored as close to the shoreline as possible to maintain navigation in the channel. The fill can be
brought onto the site and transported flown the bank over ca", or it can be placed from a barge. Standard bane
protocols apply. It is likely the first option will be utilized. After the rill is placed, the slope can be graded, protected
with jute malting, and planted at the earliest opportunity. It is suggested that temporary watering be installed far the
first two growing seasons. All irrigation on the bank must be removed after two years, unless further planting is
necessary to achieve the desired success rate.
Pre -Construction Meeting
Prior to construction, a pre -construction meeting shall be held on -site with the Contractor, Property Owner (or
owner's representative), and the Conservation, Commission and/or agent. The purpose of the meeting is to clearly
delineate the limits of work and access, as well as the staging area. The Contractor will describe the proposed means
and methods for performing the work within xhe requirements of the plans, order of conditions and construction
protocol_ The Contractor will comply with mitigation measures as established by the Conservation Commission.
To be discussed at this meeting:
Existing property conditions, necessary precautions to be taken by the Contractor;
+ Means and methods for construction;
• Means and methods for siltation controls;
• Necessary post -construction reparations and conditions;
• Procedure for post -construction inspection;
• Shorefront Consulting's responsibilities for inspection and project coordination
During Construction, the site shall be accessible for inspection during reasonable hours by all parties, members of
the conservation commission and their agents, and the Project Manager.
Rost -construction meeting
Upon completion of construction, but prior to equipment being removed from the site, a post -construction meeting
shall be held on -site with the Contractor, Property Owner (or owner's representative), and the Conservation
Commission and/or agent. The purpose of this meeting is to determine that the project has been satisfactorily
completed in accordance with all permits, and that no additional work or mitigation is regi)ired h}y the Contractor.
Restoration of project area
Upon Completion of constructio1% the staging areas, vegetated areas, and any other areas disturbed by the construction
effort shall be resumed as much as practical to their pre -Construction conditions to the satisfaction of the property
owner and conservation agent. All disturbed vegetated areas shall be re -vegetated with indigenous vegetation to
match pre -construction conditions for the surrounding areas, or:as determined during the pre -construction meeting.
Page 5 of 5