My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/17/2002 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
10/17/2002 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/2/2018 5:03:52 PM
Creation date
3/2/2018 1:25:53 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
10/17/2002
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
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
whether to do it administratively or under an Amended Order, because the Order o <br /> Conditions has a no-engine prohibition. It vera§ decided that Mr. Hessler should request <br /> ars Amended Order of Conditions, and it would be recorded for future owners. <br /> 10. Commission vacancies. Bob reported that two people have exp ressed interest ion <br /> becoming Commissioners, and he recommended that he invite them both back for <br /> further discussions. There is room now for one Commissioner and two Associates. <br /> 11. Commendation letters for staff. Bob reported that he misplaced Jack's letter to <br /> Aqua and Pauline. Jack will reprint thea. Diane thanked the Commission for their <br /> letter and hoped Aqua and Pauline will receive heirs soon. <br /> . AFCEE report on sphagnum. This regards expansion of two extraction wells. <br /> Bob reported that at our request they did a certifiable analysis of the associated <br /> wetlands and the impact of the expansion, Diane said they found several vernal pool <br /> species, and 160 spotted salamander egg masses. This is new information, and we <br /> have the authority to place additional Commissions there to monitor the water, because <br /> the extraction wells may have an impact . Bob said it's the only one they' re seen with a <br /> Virginia chain fern in it. He said the amended order states that we would not approve <br /> any pumping until such time as these reports have been submitted to us and we have <br /> agreed upon protocol and thresholds, etc., and we're a long way from that. <br /> Diane said the first step should be for them to certify the pools or we could certify them <br /> ourselves. She said they have had this permit for a while and they have not come back <br /> to us with the protocol that was required in the permit. The history of these folks is <br /> y <br /> the # done ghat the wanted and then come Ii after the fact. Since this is significant <br /> new information on an existing Carder of Conditions, under the Wetlands Protection Act <br /> Regulations we have the right to reopen this hearing and impose these new conditions, <br /> and require then to bring the protocol to the table. <br /> Bob recommended that he write there a letter citing the original agreement and saying <br /> that based upon the additional information, we want to make an new agreement with <br /> thea that will emerge after a public hearing. <br /> Michael asked if we can insist that they do this by a certain date at which time vire could <br /> rescind that amended order. Bob said he didn't think so because it wasn't in the <br /> original. <br /> Diane said there's usually a standard condition hat's put into our permits that says i <br /> new information comes forward that shows an adverse impact to the area, the <br /> Commission has the right to ask for a new filing or an amended order. <br /> Bob said they have given us specifications of the systems that they propose using, but <br /> they didn't address the pumping rates in terms of impact to the wetlands. <br /> 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.