My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
6/1/1999 WATERWAYS COMMISSION Minutes
>
6/1/1999 WATERWAYS COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/26/2018 5:28:21 PM
Creation date
2/26/2018 1:26:38 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
WATERWAYS COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
06/01/1999
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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
option, and when you have those numbers you are in a position to ask the Conservation <br /> Commission to cooperate. <br /> Mir. Lumsden asked why don't we ask for an RFP. Mr. Hanks s said to issue the Full <br /> RFP at this time would be a mistake because there are too many unknowns, We can issue <br /> an RFP that says, "Go cost out upland disposal, to merit,the northern part of the Sternberg <br /> Parcel} cost out the subsidence deepening and cost out the idea of the barge and <br /> clamshell." Then, you go with that information into a full RFP. Mr. Daly said the idea is <br /> not to go out with a full RFP, but to go with one that will give you the ammunition to go <br /> i for a full RFP. <br /> Mr. Baker suggested the cost estimate break out the costs of permitting as well as <br /> the cost of dredging. llr. Lumsden suggested we need all the information so our story has <br /> a backup. You are not going to put any pressure on anybody unless you have all the <br /> information. <br /> Mr. Silver suggested this be relegated to a subcommittee. Mr. Daly believes we <br /> now have a general plan as to where we grant to go. We still need to ask a few questions. <br /> The idea is to get the cost proposals in our hands as quickly as possible. <br /> Mr, Lumsden asked if we would have all of the information for ars P.FP to be <br /> prepared at the next meeting. Mr. Hanks believes that is a reasonable objective. <br /> 5. Aquaculture Moratorium objectives Discussion <br /> Nor. Hanks asked Mr. York if the State recommended that Steve Ball move his <br /> aquaculture into Waquoit Bay because of the ruppia grass they found. lir. York said that <br /> was a suggestion from the Corps of Engineers at an informal meeting. <br /> Mr. Hanks said that Steve Ball informed him he had no intention of moving into <br /> Waquoit Bay. Mr. Hanks asked if there was any intent to look for another site. Mr. York <br /> stated that Mr. Ball was more resolved to stick to the existing site. To go to another site <br /> would start the pro ees s all over again. That is just the permitting on his grant. It is not <br /> past of the moratorium, <br /> 6. Coastal Resources Committee—Mr. Daly <br /> Mr. Daly passed around some information from.the Mass Bays Project. He <br /> reported that the Mass Bays Project effort has been cut back. They are opening <br /> themselves up as an action office to get grant money. They have come up with a list of <br /> program priorities. They asked Cape Code to come up with a list of priorities. <br /> 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.