My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11/30/2006 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
11/30/2006 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/5/2018 11:06:25 AM
Creation date
3/5/2018 11:05:09 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
11/30/2006
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
Jack said that some of these people do not live in this area and are not abutters, but if there are 10 <br /> people who are willing to sign and send in letters considering an application, we are allowed to <br /> accept them, and there are more than 10 in this case. Steve said he could debunk every <br /> opposition point in every letter. He thinks it's arbitrary and capricious as to where the letters are <br /> coming from. One writer referred to the road and said in parenthesis"Sherwood Drive, I think <br /> that's the name of the road." <br /> Steve said: <br /> a) The only coastal dune that comes into play in this project is on the backside of the house that <br /> is being enhanced. The one up front is not a coastal dune-it's a coastal bank by definition <br /> because it has a 10 to 1 slope or less within a flood zone. Coastal banks are integral or the <br /> following: "If the seaward base or site of any elevated land other than a coastal dune which rises <br /> at the landward end of a coastal beach, land subject to title action or other wetland..." is the <br /> definition, and it obviously fits within that definition. <br /> b) The performance standards state, "You shall not destabilize that bank, you should not <br /> interfere with any sediment transport that is happening." Steve said that there's no sediment <br /> transport coming from this bank, because it's simply a bank by definition. <br /> c) There are obviously no bulkhead, revetments, sea wall structures, groins, or other coastal <br /> engineering structures. <br /> d)There are no shellfish there. It would be tough to prove that putting a carriage house at the top <br /> of the bank and putting in all kinds of plantings to stabilize that bank would have any affect on <br /> shellfish. <br /> e)He firmly believes that the construction would be done with no destabilization of the bank. <br /> Then the bank will be mitigated for and stabilized—it's already pretty stable. We had a project <br /> that we approved earlier tonight that is going to address any other erosion problems on the entire <br /> expanse of the bank. So destabilization is not a factor, we're not going to get any erosion or <br /> runoff that's going to impact any invertebrate or vertebrate species. <br /> f)Re the By-law, when it comes to the State Act, he and Mr, Slavinsky talked to people in DEP, <br /> and they have allowed houses to be built on coastal banks—we've seen it here in Mashpee. <br /> g)In the local By-law we have this wonderfid mitigation regulation that allows for projects that <br /> don't necessarily fit the need of the requirement. However, when the need of the requirement is <br /> not met, what the Commission has been doing mostly under his tenure has been that when <br /> there's overwhelming mitigation provided—and we're talking about an area behind the house <br /> that has obviously been used for something that should not have been, it was used as a staging <br /> area for a house constructed on the bluff. He and Bob had wondered why it was struggling and <br /> not like any coastal dune beside it or down the stretch, or down by Mr. English's property, or the <br /> old Garguila residence, etc. So the absolute enhancement of that coastal dune behind that house <br /> is a definite plus. We needed to have 3,230 sq. ft. of mitigation provided, and 4,050 is provided. <br /> He's sure the pine tree issue can be addressed by replacing them, but as far as he's concerned, <br /> planting pine trees in an area where the utility company is going to come through and just cut <br /> them out in a couple of years anyway is worthless. He'd rather put in shrubs and other plants <br /> that are going to be low-growing, that aren't going to interfere with any utility lines. <br /> 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.