Yarmouth homeowners and developers will soon face stricter requirements for environmental planning as the Conservation Commission moves toward mandating professional sign-offs for landscaping and wetland restoration projects. During a wide-ranging session on November 20, the Commission advanced new policy language intended to professionalize the permitting process and protect the town’s sensitive coastal areas from unsuitable development and "do-it-yourself" planting failures.

Conservation Agent Britney proposed that any landscape plans exceeding 250 square feet must be prepared or certified by a professional, such as a horticulturist or landscape architect. This avoids unsuitable plantings, she explained, noting that for more critical wetland restoration plans, such as those in salt marshes, there should be no size limit and the highest level of scrutiny should apply. Chair David Bernstein expressed a desire to protect the rights of residents to perform their own work, stating, I’d like to leave open the opportunity for people to do things themselves if it can be reviewed and initialed by a professional.

The board debated the feasibility of local nurseries providing such certifications. Member John Frost suggested that If they go to a garden center, they can ask them to sign off to identify the species, but Vice Chair Paul Huggins remained skeptical of the administrative burden on local businesses, noting, I don't know if a nursery has the capacity to review plans. 'Certified' is the key word. Ultimately, the board focused on strengthening the requirements for the most sensitive areas. Motion Made by J. Frost to accept the language of policy update number two regarding wetland restoration plan requirements. Motion Passed 6-0-0. Updates regarding broader landscape plans and as-built engineering scales were held for further revision.

The tension between development and natural preservation was also evident at 26 Bass River Terrace, where a proposal for a new home and accessory dwelling unit prompted a debate over Yarmouth’s lack of a "no-net-loss" tree ordinance. Kieran Healey of the BSC Group, representing owner Patricia Ellis, explained that while the project sits outside the 100-foot wetland buffer, tree removal is necessary to meet grading requirements. I met Britney out there to look at the areas where trees need to come down, Healey said. This is the bare minimum to make the site buildable.

Chair Bernstein questioned the necessity of the clear-cutting, asking, Do we really have to cut down all the trees? Member Elly Tierney, frequently an advocate for native canopy protection, expressed frustration with current town standards. The town of Yarmouth doesn't have a no-net-loss ordinance for trees? Tierney asked, adding, I'm from where no-net-loss is predominant, so I’m very surprised at this. Member Bradford Bower pushed for specific ecological replacements, stating, I just would hope that you could replace those dogwoods with oaks rather than non-native. Motion Made by E. Tierney to issue the Notice of Intent with special conditions pending a revised plan to show the replacement of dogwood trees with oak trees. Motion Passed 6-0-0.

The Commission also scrutinized a "raise and replace" project at 6 Chilton Road, where the proposed layout encroached upon the 35-foot no-disturb buffer. Scott Far of Grady Consulting argued that the new house would be no closer than the existing, but board members identified several conflicts with the town's strict flood zone regulations. Member Patricia Mulhearn pointed out that Part of your enlarged shed goes over the septic system also, it appears. Agent Britney cautioned that the health department would not allow such structures and noted that proposed retaining walls are generally prohibited in flood zones. The 35-foot buffer is a no-disturb zone, Britney said, recommending a higher mitigation ratio if any variance were to be granted.

Public concern also surfaced regarding the scale of the Chilton Road project. Resident David of Bradford Road voiced frustration with the changing neighborhood landscape. I thought you had to stay with the footprint you have, he said. We were told he wasn't changing the height or putting in a second floor. Chair Bernstein clarified that height and zoning issues fall under the Building Department’s jurisdiction, not Conservation. Facing board requests to move a rinse station and spiral staircase out of the buffer, Far agreed to redesign the project using an elevated deck instead of fill-based patios. Motion Made by E. Tierney to continue the hearing to December 4, 2025, for revised plans. Motion Passed 6-0-0.

Maintenance of previous environmental commitments was the focus for 54 Heritage Drive, where the Commission reviewed a failed mitigation plan from 2012. Landscape designer Peter Hansen explained that some original plantings had died and a patio expansion was later added without proper mitigation. We are proposing replanting the original area and providing additional mitigation for the increased patio space, Hansen said. Agent Britney recommended a long-term monitoring period to ensure the new plants survive. Motion Made by J. Frost to approve the revised mitigation plans for SE83-1899 and SE83-1923 with planting to occur in the spring, and to continue monitoring to September 2027. Motion Passed 6-0-0.

In other business, the Commission continued the high-profile request from Blue Water Resort for a seasonal beach deck to January 24, 2026, as they await comments from the Natural Heritage and Endangered Species Program regarding bird monitoring and beach raking. Motion Made by B. Bower to continue the hearing for SE83-2494. Motion Passed 6-0-0. The meeting concluded with the announcement that Christian Bova has been appointed by the Select Board to fill the Commission's final vacant seat, and a recognition of the Agent's work on recent successful land acquisitions at Town Meeting.