Laserfiche WebLink
19 February 1998 <br /> Page 12. <br /> NEARING CONTINUED TO 5 MARCID 1938 AT 99.1 P*1 I. <br /> Mashpee River Remediation: Mr. Sherman stated the subcommittee <br /> should meet soon. He did not believe Harry Desrosiers would be available. <br /> More erosion control blankets will be needed. Meeting to be held next week. <br /> Appraisals: Ralph Shaw talked with Fawn Planner. The O'Leary appraisals <br /> for TAULP and McDonald will be funded by the Board of Selectmen at a cost <br /> of $6500 and the Trustees of reservations will assume the fees associated <br /> with the Fish parcel. $9400 was quoted for the 3-4 appraisals the <br /> Commission was involved with and $8400, $3000 less for restricted <br /> appraisals. Tom was asked to go forward with the restricted appraisals in the <br /> likely event that the articles would not be approved at Town Meeting. The <br /> $3000 balan e will be required prior to submission to the Self Helga program <br /> application. The Commission would have to provide $3000 beyond the $1400 <br /> authorized. <br /> The Chairman asked how much more will be required from the Commission? <br /> Mr. Sherman stated $4400 above the original $5000, $ The Chair felt <br /> this was very substantial, a lot of money for appraisals. Mr. Sherman stated <br /> there is a specific format for self help appraisals, they are more involved. <br /> Great River: Concerning Nfichael Grot .ke's letter to DEP attempting to <br /> have Great River declared a "Non-River" under the Ri erfront Act, the Agent <br /> distributed copies of a letter he seat to DEP stating this was an "end run" and <br /> that it would be improper for DEP to hold meetings, or discuss items, with <br /> Michael for issues that were under consideration by us under Notice of Intent, <br /> if the Commission is excluded from the discussion. Also, he talked with Sally <br /> Zielinski at MACC and they are very upset with the procedure. He received <br /> a call back from Lenore White of DEP who stated It was improper and <br /> Michael did not tell them it was under a Notice of Intent. His assessment and <br /> discussion is pure sophistry and completely unfounded. <br /> Mr. Sherman stated a continuance will be necessary, based on the information <br /> in hand today, if there were no other issues, and there are, it would be <br /> believed it comes under the Divers Act. He was not sure the depiction of the <br /> Mean High Vater line is correct. Distances will have to be verified. <br /> Mr. Fitzsimmons stated he wished to address the issue of the Riverfront Act, <br /> whether or not it is germane to this application. Mr. Sherman stated it is. <br />