My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06/28/1990 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
06/28/1990 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/30/2018 5:25:31 PM
Creation date
1/30/2018 8:22:59 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
06/28/1990
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
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 2 , 1990 <br /> Page 34 <br /> . Hayes quoted from the guideline for piers that the only time an <br /> ENF is required is if a dock is proposed. It is their contention <br /> no state permits are required in this ACEC and this would trigger <br /> the MEP ' threshold. The aluminum gangplank will be on rollers and <br /> will be removed. The only thing requested to permit is the 32 inch <br /> wide aluminum gangway, 30 feet long from the walkover structure over <br /> the bank to a permitted float in Jehu Pond, A plan was presented for <br /> review. <br /> Mr, Sherman questioned the position for the float . Mr . Hayes advised <br /> it is approximately 10 feet off from a direct line from the end of the <br /> pier. Mr. west will ensure that moving it over to a direct shot is <br /> not a problem with the harbormas ter . <br /> Mr . Sherman questioned the water depth at .low tide and was told Mean <br /> Low Nater i . . <br /> Mr. Coffey -questioned if at the proposed location the depth at dean <br /> Low Nater is zero for one-third of the float . <br /> M . Hares stated if the question was if at extreme low water that it <br /> might bottom out , he would have to get back to the Commission on that . <br /> Mr. Sherman expressed concern with boats going to and from the float. <br /> He would like to hear Paul Somerville # s comments. <br /> Mr. Coffey requested the harbormaster ' s permit on the float . It was <br /> dated 2/22/87 calling for two floats 6 X 10 and one float6 X 201D <br /> They will be using a 6 x 20. <br /> Mr. Sherman was of the opinion, and according to CZM guidelines, any <br /> float has an impact on land under the ocean which has a shading impact <br /> and depth is a factor. <br /> Mr . Hayes advised it will be anchored with one small mushroom anchor; <br /> it will not swing out . He will provide information on the anchoring. <br /> Mr. York stated bottoming out would be a concern. <br /> Mr. Hayes stated the question seems to be the zero contour. <br /> Mr. Coffer asked if this is a mooring application modified in sub- <br /> mission <br /> ub- <br /> mi si n to show a float? <br /> Mr, Hayes advised under section 10 of Chapter 91 , it authorized the <br /> harbormasters to give these special permits . Mr. Coffey stated there <br /> should be a special form for them given the impacts . <br /> The Chairman asked if a Notice of Intent should be required? <br /> Mr . Sherman stated, except for the pilings, it is a dock. <br /> Mr. Hayes stated a Notice of Intent was filed on 7/6/88 . He would <br /> have difficulty addressing performance standards for a float on the <br /> water . <br /> Mr. Sherman suggested land containing shellfish. He stated he wanted <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.