03/25/2021 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes

Home Browse Search

happens to the trees from either health deteriorating, or the impact causing them to be removed. Motion made by Mr. Sweet to approve the AOOC. Motion seconded by Mr. Dalton. Vote: 5-0-0 Roll Call Vote: Mr. Sweet, yes Mr. Weeden, yes Mr. Dalton, yes Mr. O'Neill, yes Mr. Colombo, yes In favor, 5; Opposed, 0; Abstentions, 0 6:15 Marilyn C. Sinkiewicz & Gale M. Sinkiewicz, 170 Captains Row. Certificate of Compliance COC DEP 43-2982. Representative: Thomas Bunker, BSS Design. 6:18 Walter S M Wightman, 419 Monomoscoy Road. Extension request DEP 43-2351. EXT PRE/POST-HEARING AGENDA: • Presentation by Rodney Collins and Andrew Gottlieb on Article 97: Proposed sewer substation on Conservation parcel (0 Mashpee Neck Road) Town Manager Rodney Collins addressed that the Town is seeking funding for Phase 1 of the wastewater project. The Town needs the Commission's unanimous consent to move forward without delay. The Town ha been pressing forward on the erroneous assumption that the Article 97 doesn't apply here. What is being proposed is that the Town seek to provide double that acreage from property that is currently under the care control of the Town. This is commonly referred to as replication. The Town intends to use 2.5% of the 2.5 acr( of the lot at 0 Mashpee Neck Road. As proposed this pump station will take all future potential flow south of tf location and will never require expansion. He further wished to clarify why an alternative site had not been identified until now. This site was identified in 2005 and was taken over by Conservation in 2017. Mr. Sweet said he feels so much better with this option rather than what was proposed at the last meeting. Mr. Colombo wanted more information about which parcels of land would be offered in exchange. Rodney Collins said they cannot formally offer a specific parcel, but they will provide a list for the committee tc select the parcels they are interested in. Andrew Gottlieb commented that he was there as a 1 of 5 of his boa but that he believes that we'd have the support of the whole board. Ideally you could choose a property within resource area or adjacent to a property you already have control over that you might be concerned the Town would choose to do something else with, you could provide protection for that land. In good faith you'd get a commitment back from our Board to put that on the October Town Meeting warrant, which is the soonest that could do something like this, but have an agreement to have the Article 97 land petition to proceed through th legislature. At the end of the day, you'd retain the existing parcel less the 2,OOOsgft, and the 5+/- acres that th commission deemed sufficient value. From the precedent point of view of any such consideration in the future the precedent would be there's at least a 2:1 replacement of land to Conservation should the Town for any purpose approach you in the future. Agent said he wants to see the sewer project move forward, and that he understands for the Commission this isn't any easy decision. He thinks if you can achieve a status of no net loss and actually a net gain of Conservation land, particularly in this case where they're not planning to use all of the land and there are no wetlands or rare species habitat, we have the opportunity to gain land that has those types of elements, establish a net gain, and also help move along a project that will result in cleaner water quality for one of our resource areas. The prospect of giving up a relatively small amount of square footage with the assurance that this will never expand, in exchange for more land of our choosing that may have more critical resource areas, and the cleaner water through Phase 1, when you look at it through a cost benefit analysis, it just makes sens