09/07/1989 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes

Home Browse Search

onm September 7, 1989 Page 2. They then looked at the policy directive alluded to. In checking with DEB and individuals and the library at Tufts University, on reversals to local Conserv- ation onserv-ation decisions, we found they had no record f n, 1a�s pee case where cranberry y ditches were actually deterr i ned to be streams in a general broad view, They do have site-specific where cranberry boas with streams running through thea do meet the definition of a stream and do have a bordering vegetated wetland. They believe Bob Batu might have been using something taken out of content which was used in a general sense to apply to all the bogs and not just to a site-specific situation. Therefore, that cover letterwas not meant to be a policy guidance in a general sense but site-specific on one-time basis referencing an individual cranberry bog within the town of Mashpee. They looked at a superseding Order set down by DBE this ,year on a Barnstable case that stated there wasn't a bordering vegetated wetland in this bog either even though it had ditches and it did have what appeared to be a main channel in the center because it was not connEtted to any other resource area and did not meet the definition of a stream and therefore, did nct have a bordering vegetated wetland. They concluded from those two uses, the Commission should take them into account when the ruling is made as to whether these two basins are isolated land subject to flooding or whether they would have bordering vegetated wetland. In the preamble to the Wetland Act in the State, it asks the Commission to follow the performance standards and definitions as described in the Act when making decisions. They would ask the Commission to follow those guidelines, Mrs.S i mons asked i f written comments had been received and was told there were none. She further asked if they wanted an answer tonight on the RDA or if they would prefer to have it taken under c nsideration and give an answer in 21 days? Mr. Hayes stated they would lie an answer but if the Commission feels there is going to be additional information germain to the issue, they would be happy to give the Commission the opportunity to answer in 21 days. It was noted Jeff Benoit of CZM was sending information down and Mr, Hayes agreed all facts should be taken into consideration. This is the only information to be considered. CONTINUED To OCTOBER 5 - 7:30. 7:30 Mass. Dept. of Public works for a determination of applicability on proposal to update drainage,, resurface the road, update a section of guardrail and other miscellaneous items incidental to the project in Mashpee, Route 28 from the Falmouth town line to Barnstable town line 3.7 miles. Jim Hayes of District 7 presenting. The project is maintenance and resurfacing. They would like to add drainage. There are a few catch basins but it is mostly paved waterways which they would like to replace with catch basins to make the road safer. Mrs. Simmons asked for plans and information on the drainage. Mr. Hayes advised he was awaiting people f orr.� the environmental section. He showed a sketch of the work. She stated she would like to see some topography along these lines and type of basins to be put i n. He advised they are standard basins 6-1/2 ft. deep, 5 ft. in diameter. She asked for the specifications. Ms Behrman stated ShE was having difficulty figuring out where thE catch basins are in relation to the Mashpee Kiger, Quashnet River, San tuft River and Quaker Run. The representatives frons! the environmental section arrived and plans WEre available.