My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05/11/2000 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
05/11/2000 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/26/2018 5:24:57 PM
Creation date
2/26/2018 3:27:39 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
05/11/2000
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
44
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
11 May 2000 <br /> Page 16. <br /> stated he said he had not been to the site yet. It had not been evaluated. He <br /> stated Mr. Brabants has a consultant and an engineer that know that wildlife <br /> habitat is a listed interested value of the Act and Bylaw and is something <br /> that would be looked at. He suggested drawing back a bit and .....Ms Boretos <br /> stated she thought it fine to continue this if there is a good faith effort on the <br /> applicant to do some revision here. Mr. Sherman stated his point is that he <br /> rums into this all the time and every lot is specific, some have more <br /> significant interests than others. There are different configurations, different <br /> distances between wetlands and you have to look at a lot and try to cone to a <br /> determination what can be done to maximize wildlife habitat and at the same <br /> time give the person something reasonable. He does not think that point has <br /> been reached yet but it is still possible. He thinks compromise is in order. <br /> Mr. Brabants -stated this is the drawing you made out. we still have the 62 <br /> feet, very similar to the drawing we put in. He asked if it is being said that <br /> everything has to be on this side of the yellow line (pointing)? IIs Boretos <br /> stated what she did was to move the house over. Mr. Brabants stated he <br /> understands her reasoning but he still is trying to make the point that if he <br /> personally could find that he was really causing an impact to any type of <br /> wildlife, no different than any other lot that is in there that might have a <br /> skunk or raccoon in the backyard, he would be a lot more flexible. He maybe <br /> would not have bought the lot, what he is saying is that after talking to <br /> some wildlife experts and talking to Conservation, again, the cher <br /> population.,,, what is being brought up, the red fox population in Maine, the <br /> biologists are trying to eradicate them because they are the number one killer <br /> of the piping plover which is an endangered species, <br /> Mr. Sherman stated Mr. Brabants would have an opportunity, should he <br /> wish, if the hearing is continued, to bring in rebuttal evidence from either Mr. <br /> Gray or some other wildlife habitat situation. Right now Mr. Brabants is <br /> giving ivin anecdotes. There are some indications that have been found o <br /> significant wildlife habitat. He thought Diane put this together to show it is <br /> possible to get a reconfiguration that would increase wildlife habitat <br /> protection. No one is being told at this point exactly where it would go, it will <br /> have to be discussed after further consideration. <br /> Ms Boretos asked if there is a willingness on the part of the applicant? She <br /> stated she would like to make a recommendation. <br /> Mr. Brabants stated he is willing to listen to what they have, he has a major <br /> investment, The reason he bought this lot is he has seven children. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.