My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
6/26/2008 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
6/26/2008 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/5/2018 5:26:58 PM
Creation date
3/5/2018 12:58:23 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
06/26/2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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
*f - <br /> 7:03 Kathleen.and Michael Bowler, NOI—37 Birch.Way <br /> (Continued.from o '12 o )(Pier, float) <br /> Don Monroe of coastal Engineering stood to represent the applicant. Mr. Monroe described the <br /> applicants wish to install a pier and float. He explained that the.hearing was continued multiple times <br /> while they waited for-the results of the Freshwater Mussel surrey they were required by Natural Heritage <br /> to do and Natural Heritages final approval. Mr. Monroe explained that the comments and approval as <br /> back and that conservation did receive.a copy of their approval letter. IIIb. l lbnra further explained that <br /> Natural Heritages letter approves the relocation of the mussels in.the pier/float area. The Agent asked IIIb. <br /> Monroe if the mussels had yet been moved, Mr. Monroe stated that they had not yet been moved and did <br /> not need to be until the construction begins. The Agent explained that he would like a copy of the survey <br /> findings as well as he will be wrfting all of Natural Heritage comments into the order of conditions. The <br /> Agent stated that he does expect monitoring of the mussels survival and updates on their condition. The <br /> Agent recommended approval. <br /> Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to Diose and Issue. <br /> 7:06 p,m. Susan Womick and Debra Avast s, RDA#—1 Deans Hollow ted <br /> (Construct a 10'x 25' patio) <br /> Susan Wornick stood to represent herself and the other applicant. She described their wish to install a <br /> 10'x 25' blue stone patio and explained that she had submitted a land sketch of the proposed patio. The <br /> Agent-explained that he had tried to research what was there before; he could not.find an order that <br /> mandated natural vegetation in the proposed location. The Agent explained that he was told that a <br /> vegetable garden was tried in the location but that it had failed: probably due to the salt exposure. The <br /> Agent read from CMR 172 and highlighted that such a project can be approved if there would be no <br /> adverse affect on the coastal dune. The Commission questioned what type of material:would be used-, <br /> Ids. Wornick explained that it would be blue stone pagers. The.Commission also questioned the <br /> possibility of problems with run off. The Agent explained that similar projects had been allowed before. <br /> The Agent asked Ms. Womack if she could use hard packed sand and leave space between the pavers to <br /> help with any run off as well. The Agent also asked that the applicants plant bead grass near the fence <br /> to help with the runoff and stability of the area. Ms. Wornick explained that they would be happy to add <br /> the beach grass as part of the project. The Agent recommended a negative determination. <br /> Motion.made, seconded and unanimously carried for a Negative ative Detemninati n. <br /> 7:09 p.m. Robert white, 01 Leary Family Trust, Not 16 Tus pa u1n Road <br /> (Seasonal pier and float with maintenance in perpetuity D ntinued from06112/2008) <br /> Commissioner Fitzsimmons-read a letter from Lori Corsi of the Zoning Board of Appeals.The letter stated <br /> that she felt the matter should be forwarded on to.Town Council. John Slavinsky of cape and Islands <br /> Engineering stood-to represent the applicant. Mr. Slavinsky explained that he researched the area.and <br /> found that the groin that the float/pier will be located on is a licensed groin. He explained that he would be <br /> meeting with the Zoning Board of Appeals to apply for a special permit though he feels one is not <br /> necessary in this case. lir. Slavinsky stated that the pier and float are 100 Natural Heritage compliant <br /> and that the pier/float meet all Conservation performance.standards. The Agent explained that the project <br /> does meet the performance standards. The Commission explained that they would not be able to approve <br /> the project without hearing what the Zoning Board of Appeals has-to say. Mr. Slavinsky agreed to a two- <br /> week continuance but asked tliat he be allowed to say that It meets the performance standards. The <br /> Agent and Commission okayed Alar. Slavinsky stating that the pier/float meet the performance standards <br /> without approving the application. <br /> Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried for a continuance until 07/10/2008 @ 7:18 Play, <br /> 3 r <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.