My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12/05/1996 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
12/05/1996 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/23/2018 5:13:01 PM
Creation date
2/23/2018 2:21:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
12/05/1996
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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
i . <br /> 5 December 1996 <br /> Page 4. <br /> reference to a set of rules and regulations for dock uses and entitles the co- <br /> tenant to equally use the dock. <br /> Mr. Desrosiers did not feel this would have any bearing on the Commission's <br /> decision, Ms Gildea stated there might be two boats; it is not just for one 2 <br /> foot boat there is the potential that the co-tenant will also have a boat. She <br /> offered to provide the Commission with a copy of the easement. Any issues <br /> associated with the two boats require additional review by the Harbormaster. <br /> Ms Gildea stated, finally, the Great River Cove is very small and already has <br /> five docks. The potential for risk and navigation, the difficulties the existing <br /> dock owners may have in getting around this dock are all serious concerns. <br /> The New Seabury Architectural Review Committee is going to require <br /> engmeered plans. <br /> Mr. hocarno stated that is not true; he has a letter from them. They want to <br /> review the letter before they approve there. That is in his application here; <br /> whatever 'is done here has to come back to the Commission for approval. He <br /> stated his purpose of coming here today and getting together with the <br /> Harbormaster and SheMh Con n-dssi n was to see if there was a problem. <br /> He was advised if he built the dock in the direction he put in his application, <br /> which was 300 degrees, there was no navigational problem He also brought <br /> someone dawn from Conservation and all three people present started he <br /> needed approval but they did not see any problem. He is not looking for final <br /> approval.but for direction. <br /> N r. Sherman stated it is not clear whether an engineered plan is required by <br /> the Architectural Review Committee but if they require it, the Commission <br /> should have it also. Mr. Locarno agreed, Mr. Sherman stated no one from <br /> this Department ever told Mr. hocarno that this is a fait accompli. Mr. York <br /> is a marine biologist looking at land under the ocean, even though none are <br /> present. The Commission needs to have a closer look. <br /> Mr. Sherman stated Mr. Rosenbergs input is needed on this easement. <br /> Mr. h arno stated be fully expects i will be necessary to put the haat on <br /> mooring. e would like a dock for access; it is not his intention to leave the <br /> boat at the dock, that is not critical. <br /> Mr. Sherman stated navigation is more properly a subject for Board of <br /> Appeals. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.