My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12/3/1980 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
12/3/1980 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2017 3:39:35 PM
Creation date
3/10/2017 3:39:35 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
12/03/1980
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
r r <br /> Charles: It is ,just about one on one. <br /> i?avn__: I thought it was less than that. <br /> Charles: It was called one on one. <br /> Wayne: It would be a shame to put a revetment in those areas that are real <br /> touchy like underneath that cottage; for example, and then have, without any <br /> other further stabilization of the upward slope, that sand erode down and over. <br /> Mr. Savory: You want to get it out far enough. <br /> Charles: All that I can see is that if we can go ahead and make a statement of <br /> how we think it can be done and send 'it up to DEyE and see who squawks the most. <br /> Mr. Kuebler: Requests that an Order of Conditions be written up. <br /> Pauline: Not until we have a number. <br /> Mr. Kuebler: We should call for a number. I will call tomorrow and I will send <br /> a driver up. <br /> Pauline: Usually they are pretty prompt. <br /> Mr. Kuebler: If DEQE is hanging their hat on a technicality, we will go up and <br /> resolve the technicality. I don't think that the Board should delay in preparing <br /> their Order of Conditions on that technicality because I think what we are saying <br /> is that we submitted everything we thought we should. The difference between a <br /> definitive plan, which would be a structure or something like that, and a profile <br /> on a bank that is as irregular as we have, we simply showed the locus. We showed <br /> a blow-up of the area. We showed the basic elevation of the bluff. <br /> Dorothy: Do we have an original plan when the proposal was submitted? <br /> Ken: Just a topo sheet. (.Asks if that is What they sent to DEy)E) <br /> Mr. S=.vary: Yes and that is when the form came back and said two definitive plans. <br /> I said: "lihet plans would you like?". I explained the situation. He said: "I <br /> can see where definitive plans are not required and we will give it a number". <br /> Dorothv: We have to have a picture on paper showing the stone mound and what is <br /> going to go behind it and showing the slope of the bank. <br /> Mr. Savory: Of course, we proposed in our letter of intent compatible fill material. <br /> Dorothv: Compatible fill doesn't tell us anything really. You have to show us a <br /> picture. We have got to have a plan to go by. That is not our regulations. It is <br /> required in the statute. <br /> Mr. Kuebler: Are we saying and can we leave this room with the understanding that <br /> you people will issue an order of conditions apnrovi.'t_. tiie toe stones? And can we <br /> then, with some filter paper, fill behind using compatible -,aterial and then stabil- <br /> ize the bank using stu r^s and other material the will star; the generation of soli <br /> that will support the dune grass and so forth? If that is :: at you want na to dc, <br /> we can submit a new notice of intent. <e can =et a drawinof a stone aow,d sho::- <br /> ing the ':eight, the depth and where it is below sea (a cross section and so for=m). <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.