My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07/27/2000 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
07/27/2000 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/28/2018 5:12:21 PM
Creation date
2/28/2018 12:48:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
07/27/2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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
27 July 2000 <br /> Page 13. <br /> unanswered questions, some inconsistencies and some gaps in the <br /> methodologies. A few answers were received tonight but more work remains <br /> to be done. He pointed out the Chapter 172, the local bylaw, section 12 <br /> empowers the Commission, if it deems it necessary, to bring in an outside <br /> consultant to evaluate things up to a cost of$2500. He is not sayjng there is <br /> meed to do that but if there is any particular readm of this particular work <br /> that Bill Fisher's group does not feel competent to advise upon, it might be <br /> that some independent corroboration may be requested. He stated the <br /> benthic survey is important. How that is done and the completeness of it is <br /> crucial. <br /> Lastly, Mr. Sherman stated the Commission would need, in his opinion, <br /> specific written indications from 1IA as to why the process is not needed. <br /> The 1 E A regs state if you alter more than 10. acnes and a state permit i <br /> needed, you have to go through MEPA. If they have an interpretation that is <br /> otherwise, the iCommission, at the local issuing authority level would like to <br /> understand why the MEPA regs aren't being interpreted by MEPA the way <br /> they are written. similarly, Mass Natural Heritage & Endangered species <br /> Program response isery important and it will not be possible to wait the <br /> usual thirty days, a written response is necessary from then giving their ' . <br /> specific blessing to this specific project which isn't as specific at this point a <br /> he believes it needs to be. <br /> A problem emerged this afternoon with the ramp where the staging area is <br /> and the chemicals are being stoked. It is important to have safeguards from <br /> spills and accidents. Unfortunately, what the Commission says should be <br /> dome would not be incumbent upon them because this is filed in 1lashpee and <br /> the ramp is in Falmouth so an order of Conditions would not have any legal <br /> means of implementation to insist things be done a certain way. It is possible <br /> this could'be worked out with Steve Hurley on another level. <br /> Mr. Sherman had a conversation with Perry Ellis, 1 l shpee Harbormaster, <br /> and he might errant to make a comment about keeping boats out of a certain <br /> area for an amount of time. <br /> Mr. Ellis suggested a large sign be implemented at the ramp instructing <br /> boats to stay away from that area and a couple of legal ads placed in the local <br /> papers giving a little more background. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.