My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04/27/2000 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
04/27/2000 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/26/2018 5:21:41 PM
Creation date
2/26/2018 3:26:21 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
04/27/2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
36
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
Mr. Sherman informed the Commission that he had suggested <br /> the Assistant Conservation Agent not make an on- site inspection <br /> without a revised plan indicating Conservation Commission staking <br /> requirements (which requirements have been recently clarified) <br /> as clearly outlined within the policy that numbered stations are <br /> required on the coastal bank and work limit; lettered stations on <br /> the douse corners. He explained how much more difficult it is to <br /> make an inspection when these requirements are not in place and <br /> especially at this particular time when the department is <br /> overburdened and pressed for t irate. <br /> Mr. Sherman informed the Commission that the official plan <br /> of record submitted with the filings did not include the -equired <br /> a in s. He suggested this matter be continued in an attempt to <br /> -allow the Conservation Commission and the Applicant to review and <br /> possibly revise (reorient, reduce the house) ; as well as to <br /> clarify and comprehend the staking issue. <br /> Mr. Sherman agreed with the Assistant Conservation Agent <br /> that the entire area is considered to be significant wildlife <br /> habitat, one of the last areas existing i thin the 'down, and that <br /> he is quite comfortable deferring to Ms. Boretos in matters of <br /> wildlife habitat analysis. <br /> Greg Wirsen asked the Assistant conservation Agent which <br /> impacts/concerns are more detrimental to the wildlife habitat; <br /> activities associated with the house, or those associated with <br /> the pool area. <br /> Ms, Boretos explained there exists utilization of two <br /> seasons on the subject property, both denning and breeding <br /> purposes as well as overwintering for yarding for the deer <br /> population. She suggested the focus be placed on the yarding <br /> aspects provided for the deer by the wetland; therefore, <br /> consideration should be given to the house and the noises and <br /> activities associated therewith. <br /> Ms. Bortos suggested the Applicant consider relocating the <br /> house as far away as possible from the wetland, as well as some <br /> meaningful mitigation (shrubs will not mitigate noise or visual <br /> impacts) . <br /> The Chairman recognized Bob Gray, who stated the previous <br /> owner, New Seabur , had conducted a Study of the vernal pool <br /> habitat, which Study has been continued under the direction of <br /> Lancaster Realty Trust. <br /> A Study had been conducted in November of 1999 of the <br /> subject wetland for vernal pool habitat characteristics, which <br /> has been continued through the months of March and April 2000 . <br /> 'today being the first time there has been a significant amount <br /> of water. As noted in a report submitted for Conservation <br /> Commission review entitled, "Sabana, Inc. Robert M. Gray, P.W.S. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.