My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5/20/1999 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
5/20/1999 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/26/2018 5:26:00 PM
Creation date
2/26/2018 2:48:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
05/20/1999
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
20 May 1999 <br /> Page 4. <br /> continuance' as requested because they were redoing the plans on a 20 scale <br /> and reflective of the changes the Agent had requested. The 1A is only for <br /> the delineation ofthe wetland resources. had requested relotation of four <br /> wetland flags for BVW and more detail. The only issue Ms Fantozzi stated <br /> she is aware of to be addressed is the delineation f the River resource area. <br /> There are two areas for discussion. The first is the golf course, the old gravel <br /> dirt road on the side ofthe Golf Course hole x#10 and the woody swamp area <br /> that feeds down to shoestring Bay. Quaker Run is a stream by definition and <br /> b - agreement with the Agent in the field. The question comes as to where <br /> does the intermittent stream become a stream in terms of perennial flow. <br /> When she was at the site with Bob, in this area of the channel located by the <br /> survey crew there was some water in the channel. At this point, (pointing to <br /> the plan , Bob wanted to call it a stream as opposed to an intermittent <br /> stream because of flow in the channel. He had said if she could get a letter <br /> from Bob St. Thomas who has been with Willowbend Development since 1987 <br /> testifying to the fact that it is an intermittent stream, because it is dry at <br /> least two months and sometimes more than that. She presented an original <br /> for the file. she read from the letter Mr. St. Thomas' statement that he has <br /> watched that area because of his duties and responsibilities with the Golf <br /> Course and during the months of June, July, August, September and into <br /> October, that area is dry, depending upon the precipitation. The other <br /> component that affects that pant of the channel relates to the cranberry bog <br /> flow because they gate it and the eater does not flow down because of the <br /> cranberry bog management when they are flooding water or using it for <br /> irrigation. It is a managed portion that connects that to the Cranberry bogs <br /> through the golf course pond. It is their contention, based on documentation <br /> and observations, the stream starts here, where they join. <br /> Mr. Fitzsimmons asked if this is because of whether or not the Riverfront <br /> Protection Act applies: Ms Fantozzi stated that vias correct and they show <br /> the rivers protection resource areas on this plan. In areas where Mean High <br /> Water did not match, the local riverfront sometimes has greater jurisdiction <br /> because it is from the BVW. otherwise, she thought Mr. Sherman and she <br /> were in agreement. <br /> Mr. Sherman stated they have a professional disagreement. 310 CMF 10-58 <br /> (2), section 1, section c, has some criteria by which we judge perennial <br /> stream vs. Intermittent stream. He read from the act. He does not think <br /> there is any criteria developed in any precise fashion hove and at what <br /> periods of time that flows in what proportions. There is one anecdotal <br /> statement from Mr, St. Thomas. This is a very limited observation, it does <br /> not have any stream flow measurements or logs. Under the Commission's <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.