9/22/2005 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes

Home Browse Search

7;30 p,m,, Brian Kanter, 36 and 40 Great liver Road (continued from 918105). Chris Costa represented the applicant. Steve described t e plan and recommended approval. Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve this 1I. 7:35 p.m., Elliot Bloom,41 Fiddler Crab Lane rebuild existing float ramp, dock and stairs). Mark Burns represented the applicant. Steve described the plan and recommended approval. Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve this RDA. 7:40 p.m., New Seabury Properties,LLC,42 Seanest Drive, (brush clearing and native plantings). John Bresnehan represented the applicant-and described the project. Steve recommended approval. Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve this NOI. 7:45 p.m., Jaynes Bertino, 37 Pond Circle (continued from 9/8105). John Slavins y represented the applicant-and described the project. Steve recommended approval. Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve this NOI. 7:50 p.m., Thomas Dargan, 5 Uncatena Road (continued from 9/8105). Dave Sanicid represented the applicant. Steve said the only reason approval was held up at the last meeting is because the revised plan had not been received five days prior to that hearing, and he recommended approval. Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve this NI. 7:55 p.m., William Marsters, 94 Lakewood Drive(continued from 318105). Bob said Cape Islands has informed us that they are no longer representing Mr. Marsters, and no one was present to-represent-him. He said a they put in a wall without a permit at Ma.shpee Wakeby Pond, b through an enforcement order we told hire to file a plan, and Cape&Island prepared a plan, and c Natural Heritage required a mussels survey. We continued several dynes because the mussels survey was not done. Mr. Marstei-s offered to tale out the wall and we told hire that we would consider that. To remove the wah we would require a restoration plan done by a professional wetlands scientist or the equivalent. National Heritage at that point in time had not rescinded their requirement for the mussels survey. Bob contacted DEP about this. Since Mr. Marsters did not see fit to be here tonight, Bob"s recommendation is to deny the wall because of'Insul "i ient information, to issue an enforcement order requiring the removal of the wall and a plan for it done by a.professional wetlands scientist or the equivalent, and to note in the enforcement order that this does not rescind Natural Heritage's requirement for a mussels survey. 3