My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
6/4/1992 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
6/4/1992 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2018 5:10:26 PM
Creation date
1/26/2018 11:30:46 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
06/04/1992
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
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
Conservation Commission <br /> June <br /> o ssion <br /> June 4. 1992 <br /> Page 8. <br /> Mr. Slavinsky was not sure about the pilings. They would have a real good case for <br /> going for an Amnesty license but they want to straighten things out. He would not <br /> come in on this date with anything of that design. <br /> Mr. Sherman stated there is salt marsh die-off. Things should be retrofitted to <br /> meet performance standards. <br /> Mr. Slavinsky raised the question, what if he goes back and they say forget it and <br /> go for the Amnesty license? <br /> Mr. Sherman stated DEP is turning down some lie this. He woad have reservations. <br /> If the walkway were higher and there was some elevation of Moats blocking shell- <br /> fishermen, it would be a consideration under the bylaw. <br /> Mrs. Simmons stated they have one too many floats in there. Mr. Slavinsky agreed. <br /> There is pe rt for three floats <br /> Mrs. Simmons stated whoever drove the pilings knew that when they did it. She <br /> recommended it be elevated and one float removed. <br /> Mr. Sherman would gather see hien stay in deeper water and elevate then. It was <br /> noted the structure is solid. He would recommend denying it as it is and if they <br /> go for Chapter 91, the Commission could recommend thea denying 11t. <br /> Mr. Desrosiers pointed out the Moat is % larger than it was. They would have' to <br /> prove when they put it '.n. <br /> Mr. Sherman stated the client should redesign to performance standards or the <br /> Commission deny, <br /> Public comnents were requested; there were none. <br /> VOM: Motion made and seconded to continue to July 9, 1992 - 9:05 p.m. at the <br /> request of the applicant. <br /> CONTMM To JULY 91, 1992 - 9:05 p.m o <br /> Mrs. Sons stated it was brought to light at Finance Co a.tte , that the Comm- <br /> ission had only used % of Expense money, There are next to no departments who <br /> are handing back the entire . She suggested if a mouse is needed, or more truck <br /> work, to go agead. <br /> The Chairman will contact the Finance Committee liaison for assurance money will <br /> be available in the fall', if necessary. <br /> QUASHNET: 1r s. Fudal.a met with Peter Tru mbu l, Tom Fudala and Donald S chall at the <br /> site. She stated it can be conditioned, mowing after July and that they put up the <br /> bird boxes. They will put them up and provide the materials. Location will demark <br /> the location of cutting. <br /> It was thought it would not be suitable to use the bird boxes to demark location. <br /> Mrs. Fudala stated in the field, not where they want. In July it would be l ited. <br /> Bluebird boxes should be beyond the two rowed areas. <br /> Thee was discuss*on of the monitoring of mowin and Mg's* Eudala agreed t monitor. <br /> g <br /> 4- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.