10/09/2025 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes

Home Browse Search

Town of Mashpee Conservation Commission 16 Great Neck Road North Mashpee, MA 02649 along the inland bank, and give replacement trees time to establish. He also noted that the Santuit Pond area has been heavily affected by the regional beech tree disease. Ms. Gaboury confirmed that she would follow Mr. Kent's recommendations and plant a variety of native species. Mr. Kent suggested two maples (for fast growth and adaptability near water) and two oaks (black or white oak) as appropriate hardwood replacements. Ms. Thornbrugh asked about the placement of the saplings, and Ms. Gaboury confirmed they would be planted in similar proximity to where the removed trees currently stand. She also recommended leaving tree stumps at least several feet high as wildlife snags, which benefit species that rely on decaying wood for habitat. Mr. Kent advised that, for safety and stability, the stumps instead be left six to ten inches above grade, a practice that still supports root structure and allows for planting around them. MOTION: For a negative determination at 34 Cranberry Lane with the condition that all stumps remain six to ten inches above grade. Motion by: Richard Sahl Seconded bv: Sandi Godfrey Vote: Motion passed by unanimous vote. (Steven Coop, Sarah Thornbrugh, Sandi Godfrey, Seana Pitt, Richard Sahl) RDA 18 Starboard Lane, Shallow Shores, LLC. Proposed Septic System Upgrade. (Representative: Cape & Islands Engineering, Inc.) The project proposed a septic system upgrade along with work on an existing deck. Commissioner Cook disclosed that the applicant was his client and that he had designed the deck; therefore,he recused himself from the hearing. Vice Chair Thornbrugh assumed leadership of the discussion. Engineer Mark Dibb presented the proposal on behalf of the applicant. He explained that the property, approximately 8,000 square feet, contains an existing dwelling and several resource areas nearby. The site lies between Starboard Lane and Waiting Place, with a coastal bank to the east that defines the 75-foot and 150- foot buffer zones. A small portion of the property also falls within the flood zone on the northeastern side. Mr. Dibb stated that three components of the project fall within the Commission's jurisdiction, including work on the existing deck on the east side of the house. He explained that the new sauna tubes would be installed beneath the deck, which would be removed and replaced in the same location. Part of the existing deck that wraps around the back of the house would be converted into an enclosed porch, also on the same footprint. All of the work would take place outside the flood zone. In addition, a small buffer zone restoration was proposed, consisting of native shrub plantings and mitigation-style landscaping to create a vegetative buffer. He noted that other site work, such as upgrading the septic system to an innovative/alternative (IA) system with a new leach field and slightly reconfiguring the driveway, would occur outside the Commission's jurisdiction. Since the project remains within the same footprint and includes vegetative enhancements in the flood zone,he stated there would be no new impacts to the buffer zone, no regrading, and no additional work within the flood zone beyond restoration efforts. Ms. Pitt sought clarification regarding the septic system, which was confirmed to be entirely outside the buffer and the flood zone. Vice Chair Thornbrugh read from the State Wetlands Regulations (310 CMR) to ensure proper procedure was followed because the project occurs within 100 feet of jurisdictional resource areas—including land subject to coastal storin flow—the Commission must determine whether the work could alter any protected areas. If so, the applicant would be required to file a Notice of Intent (NOI); if not, the Request for Determination of Applicability (RDA) would suffice. She emphasized that the proposal adds roof area and