My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11/20/2025 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
11/20/2025 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/18/2026 5:18:52 PM
Creation date
12/16/2025 9:46:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
11/20/2025
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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
Town of Mashpee Conservation Commission <br /> 16 Great Neck Road North <br /> Mashpee, MA 02649 <br /> The Commission then discussed notice procedures for water-dependent structures. The existing checklist <br /> language references providing plans to the Shellfish Constable and other natural resources staff five days <br /> before a hearing. The Agent recommended revising this so that plans for projects involving water-dependent <br /> structures that require review by shellfish and natural resources staff are provided to those departments at the <br /> same time the NOI is filed with Conservation, rather than just a few days before the hearing. Commissioners <br /> concurred, and staff will update the checklist to reflect concurrent distribution at the time of filing. <br /> On wetland delineation and resource area mapping, the draft checklist currently lists specific features (flood <br /> zone,mean annual high water, 100- and 200-foot riverfront, etc.) that must be flagged for inspection. It was <br /> noted that this list is not exhaustive and could become unwieldy as more resource types are added. He <br /> recommended replacing the detailed list with a reference to Chapter 172, Regulation 3, requiring delineation <br /> and flagging of all wetland resource areas present on the property and their associated 75- and 150-foot buffer <br /> zones. Commissioners agreed that this cross-reference would be cleaner and more comprehensive. <br /> Finally, the Commission considered proposed clarification regarding architectural and building plans. It was <br /> suggested that the language stating that architectural and building plans are required for projects involving new <br /> home construction, raze-and-replace projects, and additions or structural changes. A question was asked <br /> whether the Commission intended to require such plans for all projects of this type, regardless of resource area, <br /> or only within FEMA flood zones where foundation type, flood vents, and elevation details are critical. <br /> Commissioners cited several recent examples, including steep-lot projects and structures close to pond <br /> shorelines, where architectural plans were helpful in evaluating potential erosion, grading, and resource <br /> impacts even outside flood zones. Members also noted that most applicants undertaking substantial <br /> construction already have architectural plans prepared, and that while the Building Department generally <br /> receives final plans after all board reviews are complete, Conservation's interest is limited to evaluating <br /> environmental impacts under the Wetlands Protection Act. After discussion, the Commission agreed to retain <br /> broad language requiring architectural and building plans for new construction, raze-and-replace projects, and <br /> additions, with the understanding that the Commission may also, in specific cases, request additional or <br /> updated building plans where necessary to assess wetland impacts. <br /> With these revisions—clarifying the 21-day hearing obligation and continuance practice, moving and <br /> broadening the five-day filing deadline, expanding proof-of-filing requirements to other relevant boards, <br /> updating water-dependent structure procedures, simplifying wetland delineation language, and formalizing the <br /> architectural plan requirement—the Commission agreed that the submittal checklist will be redrafted by staff <br /> and circulated in its updated form for use going forward. <br /> Updates: (*15 minutes) (Public Comment solicited for each update—3 minutes per comment) <br /> Chair Cook indicated the following will be addressed at the upcoming quarterly meeting: <br /> • Red Brook Road Culvert(Waquoit Bay Research Reserve-grant assistance) <br /> Mr. McManus provided an update on the Red Brook Road culvert replacement and associated habitat restoration <br /> effort at the Mashpee—Falmouth town line. He displayed aerial imagery showing the failed road culvert, the <br /> downstream drained cranberry bog cell, and an upstream bog cell that remains flooded due to an older internal <br /> culvert. Since the failure of the road culvert, the lower bog has drained and now clearly presents as an old cranberry <br /> bog with visible ditch patterns,while the upper cell remains ponded. He explained that someone has recently <br /> blocked the internal culvert—likely within the past year—by installing clamps, boards, and large stones, apparently <br /> to maintain the flooded"pond" condition. <br /> 8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.