Laserfiche WebLink
Town of Mashpee Conservation Commission <br /> 16 Great Neck Road North <br /> Mashpee, MA 02649 <br /> Additional technical concerns were discussed regarding landscaping,groundwater elevations,potential dewatering <br /> requirements, foundation design, and restoration of disturbed areas between the roadway and property line. Questions <br /> were raised regarding whether helical pile foundations or concrete foundations were proposed,the relationship between <br /> groundwater elevations and proposed grading, and whether additional mitigation planting details were necessary. It was <br /> also noted that construction impacts within the roadway shoulder area would require restoration measures and additional <br /> detail on the plans. The applicant's representative acknowledged that additional technical information would require <br /> input from the project engineer and requested a continuance. <br /> Conservation staff stated that an Amended Order of Conditions was considered appropriate because the house had not <br /> yet been constructed and the proposed changes involved modifications to an already approved project rather than a new <br /> structure. Staff further stated that the previously approved mitigation ratios remained significantly greater than required <br /> and that the enhanced mitigation had originally been incorporated because the revised house location, although <br /> improved from existing conditions, still involved development near Santuit Pond. Discussion also clarified that any new <br /> conditions imposed through the amended order would be added to the existing Order of Conditions rather than replacing <br /> prior conditions. <br /> Commission members generally indicated willingness to continue review of the matter as an Amended Order of <br /> Conditions provided that additional technical information and clarifications were submitted regarding the extent of the <br /> proposed modifications and whether the changes constituted a substantial increase to the approved project. The <br /> applicant requested a continuance to June 11, 2026. <br /> MOTION: To continue 9 Santuit Lane to June 11,2026. <br /> Motion by: Sandi Godfrey Seconded by: Seana Pitt <br /> Vote: Motion passed unanimously by roll call vote. <br /> Steve Cook,Paul Colombo, Sandi Godfrey, Seana Pitt <br /> NOI 45 Hooppole Road, Carlos Hanzi. Proposed raze and reconstruction of existing single-family <br /> home with appurtenances, site improvements, and mitigation activities. <br /> (Representative: Environmental Consulting & Restoration, LLC) (cont. 3.19/4.2/4.23) 43- <br /> 3403 <br /> The applicant's representatives stated that the property abuts John's Pond and contains inland bank and <br /> bordering vegetated wetland resource areas with associated buffer zones under Mashpee Wetland Regulations. <br /> It was stated that the project involved reconstruction of the existing home, driveway modifications to reduce <br /> pavement, installation of stormwater infiltration systems, reconstruction of a retaining wall near the pond, and <br /> related landscaping improvements. Representatives further stated that no direct wetland alterations were <br /> proposed and that the project involved buffer zone work only. The applicant's representatives informed the <br /> Commission that additional revisions had recently been made in coordination with Conservation staff but had <br /> not yet been submitted for Commission review. It was stated that the revisions were intended to further reduce <br /> the scope of work and minimize proposed alterations within the buffer zone. Commissioners indicated that the <br /> next continuation would represent the fourth hearing on the project and referenced the Commission's informal <br /> "rule of three"regarding continuances. <br /> Discussion focused on outstanding technical and environmental concerns associated with the project. <br /> Questions were raised regarding nitrogen calculations, groundwater protection standards, absence of soil logs <br /> and groundwater elevation data, potential offset requirements for increased nitrogen loading, and whether <br /> additional Board of Health review would be necessary. It was also clarified that the existing dock would <br /> remain unchanged and that no modifications were proposed to that structure. Additional questions were raised <br /> regarding existing site conditions, including debris, concrete blocks, and an apparent outdoor structure within <br /> the buffer zone, as well as whether the existing beach area had previously been permitted. <br /> 6 <br />