My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10/16/2008 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
10/16/2008 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/5/2018 5:06:19 PM
Creation date
3/5/2018 1:05:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
10/16/2008
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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
they listed it as a "no take".The Commission questioned the increase requested by the state, Mr. <br /> Slavinsky explained that they requested ' but it was not possible. The Agent explained that he thought <br /> the project adhered to the greatest extent en ineeringly possible+and recommended a close and issue. <br /> Motion made,seconded and unanimously carried to Close and Issue. <br /> 7:39 p.m. Richard ball,RDA—63 Pond Circle <br /> (Build small platform and strains to access boat) <br /> Mr. Hall stood to represent himself on the application. Mr. Hall explained that after meeting with the <br /> Harbormaster the plans for the project were redrawn to meet his specifications. Mr. Hall explained that the <br /> stairs on the project remain the same but that the float/ramp structure was changed because it was <br /> thought to be unstable as previously dawn. Mr. Hall explained that it would be replaced with s stanchion <br /> and the ramp would meet the bottom stair. The Agent explained that the project will be removed <br /> seasonally.The Agent stated that the new plan was much better and recommended a negative <br /> determination. <br /> Motion made, seconded and unanimously ca ed for a Negative ative Determination. <br /> 7:42 p.m. Richard Cohen, NOI—401 Mon m sco Road <br /> (construct a new single family home with associated appurtenances) <br /> Commissioner Fitzsimmons read for the record that the application is under review by the Board of <br /> Health. Michael Borrelli of Falmouth Bngineenng stood to represent the applicant. Mr. Borselli stated that <br /> the name on the application should now read Fancy and Richard Cook: Mr. Cohen (the potential buyer of <br /> the property) is no longer involved. Mr. Borrelli explained that new plans had been submitted to the <br /> Conservation department that he feels now address all of the concerns raised at previous hearings. Mr. <br /> orselli explained that one of the biggest changes to the plan was the shift in the work limit; ft is now back <br /> o feet from the salt marsh. Mr. Borselli further explained that the shift beck from the salt marsh also <br /> required a 15-foot shift on the front of the house and it no longer lines up with the other properties front <br /> sides. Mr. Borselli explained that the increase in separation also allowed for more trees than previously <br /> thought to be retained. Mr. Borelli explained that a lot of those trees were sacred by eliminating the boat <br /> storage and extra tura-around space in the driveway. Mr. Borseili explained that vista pruning has been <br /> removed from the application but that the applicants may be back at a later date to request that as well. <br /> Mr. Bors lli explained that while the question of coastal bank was raised at the last hearing, he does not <br /> feel that it is a true coastal bank and that no coastal bank was mentioned on a previous filing for the dock <br /> area. Ms.A.M.Wilson (Arlene Wilson)stood to address the Commission. IVIS,Wilson explained that she <br /> had been hired by some of the abutters to the property to.speak on their behalf. Ms.Wilson questioned <br /> the validity of Mr. Borselli's information regarding the coastal bank. Ms.Wilson quoted from the NOI for <br /> the dock filing and stated that.it was not paid for or noted that the resource ureas were confir ted. Ms. <br /> Wilson also questioned whether the house would meet the flood requirements laid out by the Town or the <br /> state. AAs.Milson also called into question the septic location and testing done on it. The Agent explained <br /> that those concerns needed to be addressed by the appropriate parties like the Board of Health for the <br /> septic and the Building Department for the flood construction question. Commissioner Fitzsimmons asked <br /> about the coastal bank issue and hover it could be determined to be or not to be a true coastal bank.The <br /> Agent explained than while the coastal bank on the property may meet the definition standards, it floes not <br /> in his opinion perform as one, The Agent explained that the only tither way to determine it would be to <br /> Erre an outside consultant under Chapter 53G at the expense of the applicant to determine it.The Agent <br /> asked Ms.Wilson how much further a setback did she feel was necessary if that was indeed a coastal <br /> bank. Ms.Wilson stated that she thought 25—30 feet but was not sure of the enact figure.The Agent <br /> explained that a 70-foot buffer to the salt marsh is already in place and that would be sufficient even if the <br /> bank is declared one, The Assistant Agent asked who would be used for the ;the Agent explained <br /> that there was someone they had used previously. Mr. Bors lli stated that he would have to talk the <br /> matter over with the homeowner and that they reserved the right to okay the party for the study. Mr. <br /> Bor elli stated that he still felt even if it is determined to be a coastal bank that the project meets all of the <br /> 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.