Laserfiche WebLink
Town of Mashpee Conservation Commission <br /> 16 Great Neck Road North <br /> Mashpee, MA 02649 <br /> recurring use could create continuing short-term, intermediate-term, and long-term adverse effects to the marsh <br /> resource area, rather than merely temporary construction impacts. Discussion also addressed Chapter 91 public <br /> access requirements, including whether adequate public lateral access between mean high and mean low water <br /> would already be provided beneath the structure,potentially eliminating the need for additional ladder access <br /> points. Conservation staff advised that only one access pathway to the water would generally be appropriate <br /> under the applicable regulations. Additional discussion focused on comments submitted by the Division of <br /> Marine Fisheries, including concerns regarding cumulative environmental impacts,potential impacts to winter <br /> flounder habitat, and placement of structures within sensitive coastal resource areas. One commissioner <br /> specifically referenced footnote 6 of the Division of Marine Fisheries comment letter, noting that it cited <br /> regional scientific research conducted in New England regarding impacts associated with similar structures and <br /> stating that the current application lacked sufficient site-specific evidence to rebut those concerns. Questions <br /> were also raised regarding the composition of the proposed pressure-treated materials and whether chemical <br /> leaching from the proposed materials could adversely affect fisheries or shellfish habitat. <br /> Commission members also identified inconsistencies within the construction methodology, including <br /> conflicting references to jetting, driving, or non-jetting installation methods for support posts, as well as <br /> questions regarding the feasibility of proposed barge access given the site's physical conditions. <br /> Following discussion, multiple commissioners stated that the current record did not provide sufficient site- <br /> specific expert analysis demonstrating that the project would avoid adverse effects to the salt marsh resource <br /> area. The Commission requested revised plans and supplemental materials, including clarification of <br /> construction methodology, reduction to a single ladder access point, overlay of the nearby vista pruning <br /> proposal, and a salt marsh assessment and/or independent third-party expert review evaluating anticipated short- <br /> term, intermediate-term, and long-term adverse effects to the salt marsh resource area, including response to <br /> concerns raised in the Division of Marine Fisheries comments. The applicant agreed to provide the requested <br /> information, and the hearing was continued to a future meeting. <br /> MOTION: To continue 61 & 67 Shoestring Bay Road to June 25, 2026. <br /> Motion by: Richard Sahl Seconded by: Paul Colombo <br /> Vote: Vote passed unanimously by roll call vote <br /> (Steve Cook, Paul Colombo, Richard Sahl, Seana Pitt) <br /> MOTION: For a third-party outside consultant to review the applicant's proposal for potential <br /> short,intermediate, and long-term adverse effects of the salt marsh. <br /> Motion by: Paul Colombo Seconded by: Richard Sahl <br /> Vote: Vote passed unanimously by roll call vote <br /> (Steve Cook, Paul Colombo, Richard Sahl, Seana Pitt) <br /> 5 <br />