Laserfiche WebLink
carne to-us after this recent violation# vire made him re-file the vista pruning which he did under <br /> SE 43-2230, and in that case it doesn't show the vegetation that was put in by the landscaper, <br /> but it did indidate supplementary plantings along the edges of the path which were not roses, <br /> but native plants. Also, lt 's indicated that one area once again was supposed to be allowed to <br /> regenerate, but there is nothing there now w-everything is gone. One of his most recent Order <br /> of Conditions (SE 43-2232) says, "Any further violations of this property is due cause for the <br /> Mashpee Conservation Commission to revolve this Order of Conditions and no further vista <br /> pruning will be allowed at the site." Bob's recommendation is to vote to revolve this Order of <br /> Conditions,,the enact methodology to be determined by conversations he YAIi have with DEQ' <br /> and Town Counsel. <br /> Jack read a letter from Mr. Locarno dated 7/14/04 saying he transplanted bushes that weren't <br /> thriving in the present location. Bob said his letter means nothing. He's saying he transplanted <br /> bushes when he had no permission to do so, he hasn't followed the plan, and not only are the <br /> areas around the walkway devoid of acceptable rose bushes (Bob doesn't think they are a <br /> native rose and probably aren't appropriate), but another area which was supposed to be <br /> vegetated under a previous enforcement order was vegetated at one point, but it is now bare <br /> again. The man does not pay attention to the law. <br /> Michael trot i e arrived at this point. He said Mr. Locarrno recognized that what was done was <br /> not permissible. Mr. Gr"ot l e presented copies of the contractors estimate which explains what <br /> his proposal was. The intent was to address the failure of the plants to grow properly, beef up <br /> the landscape, enrich the soil and increase the number of plantings. What happened in r ality <br /> was quite different than the proposal. <br /> Bob pointed out that in the last Order of Conditions for the Notice of Intent to apply for a vista <br /> pruning we included a planting scheme in response to a violation. He was only permitted to <br /> remove the poison ivy and briar by hand. The reveg tation was planted there and noir is gone. <br /> Mr. trot l e acknowledged that was so. He requested the Commission to issue an enforcement <br /> order giving his client 60-90 days to do the worK and if it is not acceptable th n.revoka the vista <br /> pruning. <br /> Bob said he doesn't see any reason not to revolve the vista pruning Order of Condftions noir <br /> since this is the fourth violation. <br /> Motion was made, seconded and unanimously carried to revolve the vista pruning Order of <br /> Conditions (SE 43-2232).and issue an Enforcement Order ordering a revegetation plan to <br /> confon to what vire previously had in place. <br /> 7:45 p.m., Willowbend Development corp. LILC, 37 Shoestring Bay Toad (continued from <br /> 718/04). <br /> Motion was made, seconded and unanimously cared to grant a contnuance to August e at <br /> 7:20 p.m., at the request of the applicant. <br /> 7:50 p.m,William m Kramer, 41 Pond Circle (construct addition with deck). Bob said when h <br /> visited the site he discovered some serious violations possibly done by the previous owner. <br /> Motion was made, seconded and unanimously canned to grant a continuance to August 19th at <br /> :00 p.m., at the request of the applicant. <br /> 4 <br />