My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12/4/1997 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
12/4/1997 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/26/2018 5:12:01 PM
Creation date
2/26/2018 2:03:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
12/04/1997
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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
December 1997 <br /> Page 12, <br /> will have to go outside of the footprint and it is not clear that they will not be <br /> taking down more trees and vegetation. <br /> Mrs. Terrio questioned whether the criteria was met on lot coverage. <br /> Aft. Sherman stated what has to he addressed is that at one point there were <br /> proposed plantings that were supposed to go in and this area is bare and wood <br /> chips. wildlife habitat has already been lost on this lot. The Commission has <br /> tried to show flexibility on tight lots but would have to get compensatory <br /> vegetation. <br /> Mrs. Terrio stated the Commission would want to maintain a 50 foot <br /> naturally vegetated buffer strip. <br /> Mr. Grotke stated it would be fair and appropriate to have him do the <br /> compensatory planting previously requested and give him approval for the <br /> garage contingent upon him completing that to the Commission's satisfaction. <br /> Mr. wirsen asked if there will be an erosion problem that close to the coastal <br /> bank? lir. Sherman stated it is already eroding badly. <br /> Mrs. Terrio gave Mr. tarot ke a copy of the regulation 172-7, an article on <br /> buffer strips - burden of proof, and the references, regulation 29, Chapter 172 <br /> about buffer zones and buffer strips and information on wildlife habitat value, <br /> Mrs. Terrio asked about thebathroom and the septic supporting that? <br /> Mr. Grotzke asked if the Commission would consider it a bedroom then, with <br /> the privacy? It would. He asked if the Board would be receptive to the two- <br /> stage approach? His client would not be receptive to pursue design of an <br /> alternative septic system. <br /> Aft. Sherman felt if garage were allowed, they would be going to with 12 feet <br /> of the top of the bank (fir. Grotke interjected 8 feet), way within the 50 foot <br /> and there is an existing house, a loss of wildlife habitat potential. To get true <br /> mitigation, there would have to be a very intensive vegetation of the whole <br /> area. <br /> The .architect asked if the Commission would like a landscape architect <br /> consultant to do a planting plan for review? Mr. Sherman stated he would <br /> eke some qualed person to do it, but where flexibility can be shown is when <br /> the Commis siongets some "bang for the buck in terms of wife habitat. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.