Laserfiche WebLink
representing the applicants, discussed this suggestion with his clients, who affirmed their <br />satisfaction with the proposed project and declined further alterations. <br /> <br />Ms. Godfrey expressed reservations about the absence of a waiver request for Regulation <br />25, Section C7C setbacks, noting non-compliance with footprint size standards and its impact on <br />flood storage capacity. Mr. Cook opined that despite setbacks, the project overall enhances the <br />site. <br />Motion made by Ms. Copeland to close and issue. Motion seconded by Mr. Cook. <br /> Roll Call: Ms. Godfrey (No), Ms. Copeland (Yes), Mr. Cook (Yes), Ms. Zollo <br />(No) (2-2) <br />The motion does not pass and there will be a continued discussion on Tuesday, April 16, 2024. <br /> <br />A second motion was made by Ms. Copeland to deny the project without prejudice. Motion <br />seconded by Mr. Cook. <br /> Roll Call: Ms. Godfrey (Yes), Ms. Copeland (Yes), Mr. Cook (No), Ms. Zollo <br />(Yes) <br /> <br />The motion passes unanimously. <br /> <br />*Mr. Cook leaves the meeting at this time.* <br />PUBLIC HEARINGS <br /> <br />6:30 <br />RDA <br /> 32 Barbary Cir, Matthew Kaminske, Trustee, 32 Barbary Circle Real Estate Trust. <br />Proposed maintenance of existing pier, ramp and float. Rep: Self <br /> Resource Area: Riverfront (Mashpee River). No work proposed. <br /> Mr. Kaminske informed the committee that the dock has been in existence for 30 years <br />with a Chapter 91 plan in place, although without a permit. He seeks recognition and acceptance <br />of the dock in its current state, which meets current standards under Regulation 27. Mr. <br />McManus elaborated that the project lacks a local permit due to the absence of the town's bylaw <br />at the time of its establishment. He noted that since the applicant has provided evidence of a <br />previously existing Chapter 91 license associated with the dock, it is advisable to formalize the <br />dock's footprint with the town under the bylaw. He stressed that no construction work is planned; <br />this is solely a request for acknowledgment. <br /> <br />Mr. Kaminske intends to repair the dilapidated dock eventually. Mr. McManus clarified to him <br />that no permit is needed for above-water repairs, but any underwater work would necessitate a <br />notice of intent. <br /> <br />There are no comments from commissioners or the public. <br /> <br />Motion made by Ms. Clapprood for a negative determination. Motion seconded by Ms. <br />Copeland. <br /> Roll Call: Ms. Godfrey (Yes), Ms. Thornbrugh (Yes), Ms. Clapprood (Yes), Ms. <br />Copeland (Yes), Ms. Zollo (Yes) <br /> <br />