Laserfiche WebLink
6:15 Frederick C. Mercier, III, Trustee, Mercier Nominee Trust, 254 Monomoscoy Road. NOI <br />Proposed replacement of existing pier, bulkhead, and section of marine railway. Continued <br />from 10114 for Shellfish Constable Review. <br />Matt Costa from Cape and Islands Engineering presented plans. He stated that he disagrees <br />with the Shellfish mitigation fee. Agent suggested he have a conversation directly with the <br />Shellfish Constable. All other aspects of the project meet the performance standards. He <br />explained the jurisdiction of the Commission and that it is at their discretion to issue <br />conditions with a project. His recommendation is to condition to require an amendment if the <br />marine railway should ever be used. Agent agreed that the bulkhead needs to be replaced. <br />Also, any exposed Styrofoam on the floats should be encapsulated as a condition. Ms. <br />Cadoret read commentsfrom Harbormaster, Division of Marine Fisheries, Board of Health, <br />Shellfish Constable, and a commentfrom an abutter, from 256 Monomoscoy Road. Mr. Sweet <br />asked if the Agent is asking the applicant to come back to the Commission if they intend to <br />use the railway, Agent said yes. Any sort of use should be conditioned. Mr. Sweet asked why <br />it's not treated as a separate project. Agent agreed, if indeed it comes to that. He was told it's <br />not anticipated to be used, that justifies a condition of a permit request if it is intended to be <br />used. <br />Matt Costa asked for a discussion about the shellfish mitigation fee. He thinks applicants <br />need to know when/what to expect for a fee when filling. He thinks the Commission needs to <br />make a statement about this at a public meeting. He thinks the fees calculated are very <br />reasonable. He doesn't disagree that the Commission requires mitigation, but think it's <br />appropriate for them to make a public statement as to when it is required for docks. Agent <br />said he doesn't think that's a realistic expectation for the Commission. They are to make <br />recommendations based on the proposed project, which varies from site to site. <br />Matt Costa said he just received the information yesterday or today. He hasn't had a chance <br />to speak with the Shellfish Constable yet. He's just asking for feedback from the <br />Commission, it would be helpful moving forward. Mr. Smith said the impact here is based on <br />the replacement/impact. <br />Matt Costa said they accept the mitigation fee, they aren't looking for a continuance. <br />Mr. Colombo asked about the abutter's concern. Ms. Cadoret said the owners at 254 <br />Monomoscoy said they prefer to have no boats parked in front of their property. Agent said <br />that it's not really the Commission's purview. Matt Costa said it's a Chapter 91 licensing issue. <br />Mr. Sweet motioned to close and issue with the conditions of enclosing the float <br />appropriately, to use the Shellfish Mitigation fee as it stands today, and to require the <br />applicant to return to the Commission if and when they decide to activate the railroad. <br />Mr. O'Neill seconded the motion. <br />Vote: 5-0-0 <br />Roll Call Vote: <br />Mr. Weeden; yes <br />Mr. O'Neill; yes <br />Mr. Sweet; yes <br />Mr. Colombo; yes <br />Mr. Smith; yes <br />In favor, 5; Opposed, 0; Abstentions, 0 <br />