My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05/23/2024 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Executive Session
>
05/23/2024 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Executive Session
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/9/2024 3:57:31 PM
Creation date
9/9/2024 3:57:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Executive Session
Meeting Date
05/23/2024
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
o Q: What happens if the Commission's decisions are based on state and local wetland <br />bylaws and overturned by the DEP? <br />A: If the DEP overturns the Commission's decisions, it issues a superseding order of <br />conditions. However, the DEP does not get involved in the bylaws. If the Commission <br />successfully appeals the bylaw decisions, the local bylaw takes precedence over the state <br />regulations. The DEP appeal is an intermediary step, and if the Commission is unhappy <br />with the DEP's decision, it can further appeal to the Superior Court. <br /> <br />The Agent reads the denial letter to the Commission. <br /> <br />Remand Hearing Announcement Recommendations <br />The title on the public notices should specifically state that it is a remand of the Barnstable <br />Superior Court, Case #. Abutters should be renotified through certified mail. <br />Mullen Rule applicable to the remand: Should the Commission wish to include the new members <br />in the vote, this should be expressed within the remand motion. <br />This will be addressed and discussed with the applicant’s representatives. <br /> <br />190 Monomoscoy Road <br />o Same type of proceeding and process must be filed by July 19. <br />o If the Commission is satisfied with the record as the foundation for the case's <br />determination, the record will be submitted to the court. The council will then <br />draft a written argument supporting the determination, which will be presented in <br />a single hearing before the court. <br />o The primary basis for denial is that the Commission has increased the buffer zone <br />setback regulations. However, this is unachievable due to the lot size and <br />proposed single-family dwelling. <br />o The question was whether the Commission would consider a remand if the <br />applicant were receptive to a waiver request. It would depend on the applicant's <br />effort to reduce the footprint and disturbance. However, if the Commission has <br />based its ruling on the new bylaw dimensions and is applicable to the project, this <br />is sufficient reasoning for the denial. <br />4 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.