My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5/30/1996 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
5/30/1996 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/23/2018 2:09:13 PM
Creation date
2/23/2018 2:08:14 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
05/30/1996
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
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
30 May 1996 <br /> Page 13. <br /> Ms Hamblin advised they will establish a strip 15' x 40' of indigenous shrubs for mitigation <br /> with different species proposed, three rows staggered. Mr. Sherman agreed the <br /> remediation plan is satisfactory and the hearing could close. He took additional pictures <br /> and when the work was ordered stopped, it was obvious work continued. <br /> Mr. Rich called the contractor when he found out today and told him to take everything <br /> out of the area. He requested that in the future if any Orders are issued for any work being <br /> done by the Water District that he be copied on them. The first knowledge he had was <br /> today. If notified, he will take the proper steps necessary. <br /> Mr. Fitzsimmons asked if there is another layer of supervision under him? Mr. Rich stated <br /> they still answer to him. <br /> Ms Hamblin stated part of the cost of replanting is a deterrent as far as a mitigation <br /> measure. <br /> Mt-. Rosenberg suggested that in the future any orders of the Commission, whether stop <br /> work or anything else issued to the Water District, that the obligation to see that the order is <br /> obeyed and carried out be the responsibility of the Water District. If not carried out, the <br /> Commission would not be chasing the contractor but the Water District. <br /> Mr. Fitzsimmons was disappointed as this was discussed previously; he does not want this <br /> kind of problems. <br /> Mr. Rich would not want anyone to think they are intentionally ignoring the Commission; <br /> they do the best they can to conform. Asked who the sub-contractor was, Mr. Rich stated <br /> it was R.B. Our. Mr. Sherman asked for a letter from them that they got a copy of the <br /> enforcement order and from the District that they are aware of the Wetlands Act. <br /> The Chairman agreed. <br /> Ms Hamblin asked if approval of this plan would dismiss the enforcement order? <br /> Mr. Green did not see where they could do much more. <br /> Public comments: none. <br /> VOTE: Motion made and seconded to accept the plan and issue an Order of <br /> Conditions. Unanimous Vote. <br /> Concerning a timetable, Mr. Sherman stated it will be part of the order to meet with <br /> whomever is doing the restoration work. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.