My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2/5/1998 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
2/5/1998 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/26/2018 5:15:36 PM
Creation date
2/26/2018 2:19:08 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
02/05/1998
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
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
5 February 1998 <br /> Page 15. <br /> Mr. Boyle asked if anyone has made the argument about that particular <br /> river? Mx. Sherman stated Yes, Mr. Doyle had called the State himself. fix- <br /> Doyle <br /> meant river-hke activities, has anyone come forward to discuss river- <br /> le activities on that particular body of water yet, or are they the first? Mr. <br /> Sherman did not recall but asked what difference it made? He did confer with <br /> Lenore White of DEP, the Rivers Act liaison, as to whether or not Great River <br /> is considered a river. She stated it was. They are stiR evaluating the coastal <br /> rivers and std.say some day that it isWt. <br /> The Chairman stated the applicant is entitled to check on the last point. <br /> Mr. Poorer stated it sounds as though he has no alternative but to do so. The <br /> alternative right now is that he either reduce the size of the house to within a <br /> reasonable...... The Chairman stated it was brought up that he could go for a <br /> variance. Mr. Sherman stated he would still be over the 5000 s.f He stated <br /> the Commission has not been provided with defini <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.