My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1/4/2001 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
1/4/2001 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/28/2018 5:04:00 PM
Creation date
2/28/2018 1:06:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
01/04/2001
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
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
January 2001 <br /> Page 9. <br /> 1s. Moore asked what teeth would we have? Ms Boretos recommended <br /> allowing a one-time event dredging within the three year longevity of the <br /> Order of Conditions. FIs Moore asked if they then would have to core <br /> back again? They would if they do not seek alternative access. <br /> Mr. Sherman stated other issues have been brought up to him, such as <br /> navigation and if you coo close it u , what will happen to the other <br /> portion of Pooneset Creek. 'Those are valid points but there is a <br /> process for addressing those, the appeal process and the variance <br /> process. The Commission cannot give variances at this level. <br /> Mr. 'Talbot asked if the reduction in width recommended by FIs Boretos <br /> would make a significant difference in the beach slope protected? IVIS <br /> Boretos stated was in response to visual observation, as well as <br /> comment from CZM. This is a steep slope, it cannot help but sluff in. <br /> Mr. Piftaud questioned condition #6 on the depositing of dredged spoils. <br /> Ms Boretos suggested getting expert advice for a. better place for more <br /> meaningful mitigation. She does not believe it will star long where it is <br /> proposed. <br /> Mr. Hares stated there is-already an over--wash here. They want to make <br /> sure it is reinforced there. That is ars area where there is a 3' top of <br /> Coastal Dune that.needs to be reinforced along the front. <br /> Mr. Talbot asked, without any type of vegetation on it, what is going to <br /> prevent it from moving? Mr. Hayes stated itwon't stay there. it will be <br /> sacrificial, but what it will do is to diffuse wave energies, at least <br /> temporarily, during the time of additional studies. It will buy some time. <br /> Ms Boretos stated that material will be gone by summertime. Some of it <br /> will be taken out of the system but. some ofit will be night back in the <br /> channel. Let it 'overw sh there and some sediment that goes through <br /> there but for the Soo e.y. yards of material, let it go in another wider <br /> part of the Barrier. Mr. Hayes stated there are shorefront property <br /> protection interests dere. where it is most critically needed now is in the <br /> areas of where that over-wash is going, but certainly in those areas -that <br /> have been chewed out as shown in his photographs. <br /> Mr. Ellis stated the Spit was worn don, it is gone, beyond here <br /> (pointing). It may have migrated to shore, but it is gone. After the groins <br /> were built in Popponesset, it created a scour behind it which is one of the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.