My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
8/9/2012 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
8/9/2012 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/5/2018 5:00:55 PM
Creation date
3/5/2018 1:20:19 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
08/09/2012
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
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
4) Tidewatch/Bayswater update-Agent McManus explains that at the last meeting, the commission had <br /> voted to send Enforcement orders to both New Seabury Properties and Tidewatch condominiums. At <br /> the Julyl 2th hearing, it was verbally agreed to have the filter fabric and 2 x 4'sremoved from the piles <br /> on Bayswater beach and that has since been completed. Agent McManus states that at the last <br /> meeting he did not ask for a deadline date for Tidewatch for the beach nourishment to commence; it <br /> would be ar mute point for Bayswater 'since their portion has been completed. Town counsel stated that <br /> the Commission does not have the authority to tell Tidewatch to put their sand at a different location <br /> and if they wanted to then the Commission would require an Amended order to do so. Agent <br /> McManus says that he spoke to Liz Kouloheras from DEP to describe the project from the beginning <br /> when the two sides tried to work things out up to the current situation and M . Koulohera agreed that <br /> the Commission was following the correct path. Ms. Kouloheras stated that having a verbal directive <br /> with Bayswater to have the filter fabric and.2 x 4's removed was fine and did not require an Amended <br /> Order or Administrative Approval because it was a non-compliance issue that was resolved quickly. <br /> Agent McManus states that Tidewatch owes a significant amount of beach nourishment and typically <br /> enforcement orders give two weeks for the notification period for the beach nourishment to commence. <br /> If no nourishment has taken place without some kind of compelling reason than the Commission can <br /> l oth <br /> start issuing fines on a daily basis starting at the stipulated deadline. Two weeks from August <br /> . to <br /> would be the issuance date for the Enforcement order which two weeks from thea will be August 24 <br /> as the compliance date to start the nourishment. The nourishment should take place twice a year; once <br /> in the fall and once in the spring. Tidewatch is required to place 1500 cubic yards once a year so the <br /> agent is recommending trice a year of 1500 cubic yards each to catch up. The agent is not sure of <br /> ghat the access status is but states that Tidewatch is responsible to core up with their own access on <br /> their own property if access is not granted by New Seabury which will be as stated in the Enforcement <br /> Order. chairman Fitzsimmons suggests allowing Tidewatch until August-24 th to present a plan <br /> because if they decide that they would like to place the beach sand somewhere other than what it <br /> states in their current order of conditions than they will need to file an Amended order of conditions. <br /> The plans should include the nourishment schedule, where the sand will be placed and wham access <br /> will be used. <br /> Barry Fogel from Deegan Werlin is the representative for Tidewatch and states that they-have been <br /> working with the Commission and working with New Seabury to coordinate the beach nourishment. Mr. <br /> Fogel states that they are still talking with New Seabury regarding the access, timing and quantity for <br /> beach nourishment. They had met with the Commission on July 12th and had made a lot of progress <br /> and was told that they would meet back at August 9th to carry it further but items were placed on the <br /> agenda for July 26th which they never received notice. Mr. Fogel states that there were some actions <br /> taken on July 26 thwithout their presence and now conservation Commission wants to direct Tidewatch <br /> through an Enforcement order to bring a plan with all the information required. Mr. Fogel states that <br /> Tidewatch will do that and that it is a reasonable approach but would prefer 30 days to submit such <br /> plan. Mr. Fogel would like to suggest that the plan contain an evaluation of the amount that has been <br /> provided over the years and a proposal for a catch-u p process. Mr. Fogel states that he,feels than the <br /> process is important because the order of conditions discusses beach profiling and making judgments <br /> about how and where to add nourishment based on what happens each year as the nourishment is <br /> provided. The profile will not change in front of the seawall at Tidewatch. Tidewatch hes been having <br /> profiling done at the toe to see if there has been any scouring of the toe and how much sand would be <br /> needed in front of the wall. It was determined that the toe stones are stable and holding which is why <br /> Tidewatch was suggesting that it might benefit everyone if the sand was brought with coordination from <br /> New Seabury to their.property. Mr. Fogel states that the order of conditions says that in addition to <br /> using every effort to coordinate with New Seabury that any change of the beach nourishment will <br /> require an Amended order so along with the plan that is now requested, they will include a request for <br /> an Amended order to accommodate that. As far as Tidewatch is concerned, with its compliance, they <br /> will be very unlikely to appeal to Superior court an Enforcement order if it contained a condition that <br /> was to bring a plan with the quantity of ghat would be "caught up" and a proposal as to how it would <br /> 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.