Laserfiche WebLink
October 1999 <br /> Page 9. <br /> HEARING CLOSED PENDING. <br /> 8:15 COTUIT GOLF DEVELOPMENT Co., LLC, continued from 29 July <br /> 1999. Robert Gray presenting with Sam Philos-Jensen. A detailed report <br /> was submitted to the Commission and a site visit was made. <br /> Mr. Sherman suggested they give a brief methodology as to hove they <br /> determined Mean Annual Flood Level. He wished to make clear this <br /> application does not permit any work; they cannot lift a spade of dirt. <br /> Mr. green asked if there was any objection to his sitting for this hearing as <br /> he is going to be representing an abutter. Mr. Gray stated that was not <br /> problem. <br /> Mr. Philos-Jensen advised a report published in 1995 correlates the <br /> discharge between Sant it River and Quashnet River. A formula was <br /> created lased on the discharge in Quashnet. Daily discharge measurements <br /> have been taken for the last ten years. That data is sufficient to determine <br /> the Mean Annual High water in the Quashnet River. <br /> Mr. Sherman stated he and Mr. Philos-Jensen walked the length of the river <br /> and the field signs where the high water mark would be in various sections of <br /> the river appeared to be reasonable for a one year storm evert. He had no <br /> qualms about where the Mean Annual Flood Level was placed. In some <br /> cases, going to the east, there is channeli ation of old cranberry bogs and <br /> these Mean-Annual Flood Levels ended quite some distance in which the <br /> riverfront area would start there. The revised plan is based on what was <br /> discussed the other clay. Now there is a western margin going all the way to <br /> the dike that separates the wetland adjacent to the river. The question to be <br /> decided now is that under the Bylaw regulation for the riverfront area, it is <br /> said that the riverfront area will be the Bordering vegetated wetland unless <br /> evidence is presented to the contrary that the one year annual flood level <br /> elevation is lower. A decision will have to be made tonight based upon <br /> interpretation of Conservation's regulation and based upon that <br /> interpretation them may be more field work necessary. when the regulation <br /> was written, commercial bogs were not considered. These bogs, under State <br /> law and local law, are still wetlands; they are still BVW even though they <br /> enjoy exemptions. It reads, if the Mean Annual Flood. Level coexists with the <br /> VW line then the liverfront area will extend to the end of the BVW lime. <br /> Wherever the BVW would be higher than the Mean Annual Flood Level it <br /> would stop there. He sees no reason to charge that interpretation. If the <br /> Commission votes to uphold that interpretation, additional field survey work <br />