My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
9/19/1996 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
9/19/1996 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/23/2018 5:27:29 PM
Creation date
2/23/2018 2:17:14 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
09/19/1996
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
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
19 September 1996 <br /> Wage 12. <br /> Mr. Sherman advised there was a pre-ei sting path in LSCSF, not affecting <br /> any resource area and clipping had been done. The ung is to obtain <br /> maintenance in perpetuity. <br /> Public commen s:none. <br /> VOTE: lotion made and seconded to find a negative determination. <br /> Unanimous Note. <br /> NEGA'T'IVE DETERMINATION. <br /> :00 JAMIE REGAL, 16 Brookside Circle, continued from 8 August 1996. <br /> fir. began presenting. Mr. Regan advised he put in a request to include the <br /> open space as part of the area in the nitrogen calcs. <br /> Mr. Sherman stated he did research with the latest proposal. The hearing <br /> was continued so that his request could be considered to have the parcels of <br /> open space within the subdivision in the calculations. In doing so, whether or <br /> not the Commission decides to honor this request and include this in the <br /> future, the Commission has just adopted design standards for. lawns and. Mr. <br /> Regan was subject to an earlier version of that because it hadn't been <br /> finalized. He did some calculations as food for thought and From the <br /> standpoint of this got hold of the subdivision plan and talked to Tom Fudala. <br /> Elliot may have some comments about'this but his observations come from a <br /> standpoint. of e a m' g impacts of considering this request. He did <br /> calculations for the whole subdivision, including the open space and he ran <br /> them by the Cape Cod Commission to be sure he had clone them right and <br /> they .informed him he had. If you take the whole subdivision, number of <br /> bedrooms 162,.that is 54 lots and assuming 3 per house. Assessors show most <br /> of the houses as three, some were four. Only one was two. Item E is the size <br /> of the whole complex, including open space, minus roads and wetlands. Item <br /> C assuming boo s.f paved area in each of the 54 lots. Item D assuming1200 <br /> s.f. house and assuming a 1000 s.f lawn on each of the lots. The end result is <br /> 7.6 ppm. The nutrient loading reg is looking to get 5 ppm. The Commission <br /> may want to consider this as to whether or not they want to embrace this <br /> request to include adjacent open-space. He did a more finite calculation and <br /> that is the way Mr. began phrased his letter, to consider the open space for <br /> the adjacent lots which is 10 lots. Doing the same type of calculations, <br /> assuming 3 bedrooms, that is 30 bedrooms and the same size paved area and <br /> same size roof and lawn, you get 6.43 ppm. That is already over the 5 ppm <br /> looked for. This is a new area for the Commission in terms of these design <br /> specifications for lawns. They were designed to beep the added nitrogen frorn <br /> the lawns under worst case scenarios if the protocols for fertilizer and so forth <br /> L <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.