06/11/2026 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes

Home Browse Search

Town of Mashpee Conservation Commission 16 Great Neck Road North Mashpee, MA 02649 Several commissioners expressed appreciation for the applicant's willingness to revise the proposal and address concerns raised during prior hearings. It was noted that the applicant had substantially incorporated the modifications requested by the Commission throughout the review process and that the revised proposal represented a considerable reduction in projected nitrogen loading compared to the prior design. MOTION: To close the hearing for 31 Nick Trail and approve the project subject to a condition requiring a two-year monitoring period for the mitigation plantings. Motion bv: Richard Sahl Seconded by: Sandi Godfrey Vote: Motion passed unanimously by roll call vote. Steve Cook,Paul Colombo, Sandi Godfrey,Richard Sahl, Seana Pitt NOI 68 Waterway, Robert C. & Beth Ann Junkin. Proposed demolition of the existing dwelling and reconstruction of a new flood compliant dwelling in the same footprint. (Representative: Cape and Islands Engineering, Inc.) (cont.4.23/5.07) 43- 3413 The applicant requested a continuance of the hearing to June 25, 2026. It was explained that the request was related to the pending legal guidance concerning nitrogen-loading requirements within Zone 11 wellhead protection areas. The applicant elected to continue the hearing until the Commission receives clarification from legal counsel regarding the issue. MOTION: To continue 68 Waterway_to June 25,2026. Motion bv: Sandi Godfrey Seconded by: Richard Sahl Vote: Motion passed unanimously by roll call vote. Steve Cook,Paul Colombo, Sandi Godfrey,Richard Sahl, Seana Pitt NOI 29 Flat Pond Circle, Brian Gorin & Tina Choe, Trustees. Proposed installation of an in-ground pool and associated decking, residential additions and landscape modifications. (Representative: Cape & Islands Engineering, Inc.) (cont. 5.21) 43- 3422 Mark Didio of Cape & Islands Engineering appeared on behalf of the applicants, along with the landscape architect, the applicants, and Attorney Brian Wall. Mr. Didio stated that revised plans and a written response had been submitted addressing comments raised at the prior hearing. Mr. Didio reviewed the revised materials, including information regarding the ACEC delineation, coastal bank regulations, flood exceedance maps, floor plans,prior permitting history for the site, and proposed tree work. He stated that the ACEC boundary in this area is defined by the flood zone line shown on the plan and that the referenced ACEC buffer provision was not applicable because the project is not both within the ACEC and adjacent to a water body. He further stated that the project area is not shown as inundated on the 2030 or 2050 flood exceedance maps. Mr. Didio stated that a tree table had been added to the plan identifying each tree proposed for removal, including the species, size, reason for removal, and whether mitigation was proposed. Additional trees identified as infested were also added to the plan for removal. In response to prior questions about whether the pool and patio could be moved farther out of the buffer zone, Mr. Didio stated that alternative layouts had been reviewed, including rotating the pool. He explained that the pool location was selected after consideration of foundation impacts,pool size, therapy-related needs, visibility, access, grading, and accessibility. He stated that the patio area on the westerly side had been 16