My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
01/11/1996 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
01/11/1996 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/23/2018 5:02:58 PM
Creation date
2/23/2018 2:01:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
01/11/1996
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
1 January 1996 <br /> Page 5. <br /> A& Shen= stated the lot 11a a f h-water edmi urt dei the ;ylaw. ii ri of gut there <br /> and looked at Brad all's fes. his wetland has a lot of herbaceous natter and it i <br /> impossible to confum.the wedand ane. No inventory of wetland plants was given. It is a <br /> small lot and they have to nail down the line specifically. Brad will have to provide <br /> information on hog he did this. Where is only 11 feet and Commission is looking for 50 <br /> feet and in the past has never permitted below 35 feet. He provided a copy of the <br /> reference for substantiation. The proximity to the wetland is an issue. He just received the <br /> discussion of bringing down ppm and would like to receive rationale. They are not running <br /> to mean high water with a pine based mulch situation- A&. Sherman would like that in <br /> writing. 1Ir. Stone agreed. <br /> A&. Shoan stated he would like to nm the rationale by the Cape Cod Cornnussion for <br /> input. Also, it is necessary to idents the wetland line without snow on the ground. This <br /> lot has several problems. <br /> lir. Stone asked John Roland, mpmenfing the Fast System to address the Concision on <br /> the reduction in the system. In general, figures cant out 5% removal, which is accepted <br /> by DEP <br /> Sherman stated if they claim. 0/% they should go to the State and get a letter which <br /> the ` sion could accept. Also, architectural plans wiU be required at sorne point. <br /> Public corrunents: <br /> Cordon Penman, abuttcr: In looking at the project, he noted that section of Spoondrift is <br /> sometimes under grater; there is a cert that empties into it. <br /> Stone stated the BVW flagged runs from 4 to 6, generally 5. When it floods, it must <br /> be above 3.8 to flood across the road. <br /> 1r'. Sherman stated., from a legal standpoint; it is not going to matter. <br /> Greg Taylor, an abutter, stated the layout of the house crosses the vegetated wetland line. <br /> The house should be situated in an area more sensitive to the concems of the pond. He <br /> suggested another footprint. Where is only one dace for the septic system. He would not <br /> like to see the system impacting other people. <br /> A&. itn Vias tatcd t hm is a community covenant to restrict property lines. <br /> l rlr. Stone stated the garage could be eliminated. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.