My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05/21/2026 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
05/21/2026 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/15/2026 5:01:05 PM
Creation date
6/15/2026 11:22:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
05/21/2026
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
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 /> potential construction activity near the system. Another commissioner stated that the effluent concentration from the <br /> system remained approximately 35 milligrams per liter before dilution in the overall lot calculation and reiterated <br /> concerns regarding cumulative effects in a DEP wellhead protection zone. <br /> Given the overlap with regulatory issues raised during the preceding hearing,the Commission discussed whether this <br /> application should also be continued until Town Counsel provided guidance regarding Chapter 172, cumulative effects, <br /> burden of proof, Regulation 30,wellhead protection areas, and nitrogen loading standards. Commissioners stated that <br /> seeking legal guidance would help the Commission apply a consistent approach to similar applications and avoid arbitrary <br /> treatment of projects located within DEP wellhead protection areas. <br /> Mr. Dibb noted that this application differed procedurally from the preceding hearing because the Chair had not <br /> previously requested denitrification calculations for this project. He asked whether the Commission was seeking a <br /> condition or a continuance pending Town Counsel's opinion and additional information. Following further discussion,the <br /> Commission identified the additional information requested, including clarification of dewatering details, foundation/slab <br /> elevations, groundwater relationship, anticipated need for pumping or off-site removal of water if necessary, verification <br /> of septic system components, and early installation of mitigation plantings along the bulkhead with an appropriate <br /> mitigation agreement. <br /> Mr. Dibb requested a continuance, and the hearing was continued to June 11,2026,to allow the applicant to provide <br /> additional information and to allow the Commission to receive guidance from Town Counsel on the regulatory issues <br /> raised. <br /> MOTION: To continue 68 Waterway to June 11, 2026. <br /> Motion by: Paul Colombo Seconded by: Richard Sabi <br /> Vote: Motion passed unanimously by roll call vote. <br /> Steve Cook,Paul Colombo,Richard Sahl, Seana Pitt <br /> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- <br /> AAOC 29 Jeep Place, Hans Brings. Proposed raze and rebuild in nearly the identical footprint. <br /> (Representative: Goddard Consulting LLC) (cont. 5.07) 43- <br /> 3347 <br /> The Commission reviewed a request for continuance for the Amended Order of Conditions application for 29 <br /> Jeep Place, involving a proposed raze and rebuild in nearly the identical footprint. Conservation staff stated that <br /> the applicant, represented by Goddard Consulting, LLC,requested a continuance to June 11, 2026, to allow <br /> additional time to address the Commission's prior comments and prepare revisions or responses. <br /> Staff stated that the applicant was still reviewing whether the filing should proceed as an Amended Order of <br /> Conditions or whether a new Notice of Intent would be required. Commissioners noted that this issue had been <br /> raised at the prior hearing, along with other project-specific questions. Staff stated that the applicant wanted to <br /> address the Commission's concerns comprehensively before returning, rather than appearing without complete <br /> responses. <br /> A commissioner noted that the property was also located within a DEP wellhead protection area and stated that <br /> the applicant should be informed that Town Counsel's pending guidance on wellhead protection, cumulative <br /> effects, and related regulatory issues could also be relevant to this application. Staff agreed to relay that <br /> information to the applicant. <br /> 9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.