5/16/1991 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes

Home Browse Search

Conservation ormu* sion May 16, 1991 Page 6. to submit for discussion purposes. He advised Baxter & Nye did not do the original design. 4 Pain Somerville advised Moan High water is from the inner edge of the salt marsh. Mr. Coffey requested the- Shellfish Warden's input and some alternate designs and square footage calcs (existing and permitted), percent reduction, Mitigation proposed. Mr, lesrosiers requested hard bottom vs silt depth. Ms Behrman stated reference should be made in dock applications in general, (sounding guidelines for dock application permitting). Mr. Sherman had no problem with the timber walkway.; the problem is with the floats. Y There was no public comment. Motion made and seconded to continue the hearing to June 6, .1991 at :00 p.m. CONTINUED To JUNE 6, 1991 - 7:00 p.m. 8:30 ROBERT J. KELLY, for the removal of 60 C.Y. of sand fill -and revgtation of embankment at 3 Clover Lane. No one appeared for the hearing. Mr. Sherman advised the violation has been addressed. VOTE: Lotion made and seconded to continue the hearing to June 6, 1991 - 7:15 p.m. to allow for the receipt of- abutter notification receipts. CONYMM To JUM 6.9 1991 - :15 p.m. 8:45 MW SEABURY CO. for a Determination of Applicability on a proposal to use mechanical rake to remove debris from the recreational beaches at New Seabury from approximately the mid-tide lime up to the utilized bead area, seaward of the dune and any vegetation, on Shore Drive. Michael Grotzke presented abutter receipts. The people who operate- the beach at New Seabury have observed this being done in Falmouth and if approved, they will borrow Falmouth's equipment. two inch depth is the normal pass, confined between the high tide mark and edge of the grass. It will be done weekly during the season, 25 times per year for 3 years. It will begin this side of the parking lot where vehicles access the beach t , or just beyond, Popponest Inn. Raking would be confined to the seaward side of the existing fence. Concern was raised for the disposal of the refuse and Mr. Grotzke agreed to amend the request to state all refuse will: be disposed of at the dump. Mr. Homeyer was of the belief that funds were allocated for Mashpee to purchase this same equipment and would prefer New Seabury rent it from the town if it is available here. Mr. Grotzke agreed. Vim: Motion made and seconded, with the addition of the amendment, to find a Negative Determination. KWATIvE DETERMINATION