MASHPEE CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Minutes of January 8, 2004
Public Hearing
Mashpee Town Hall Meeting Room 1
Commissioners present: Jack Fitzsimmons, Chairman, Michael Talbot, Vice Chairman, Leonard Pinaud, Clerk, Cass Costa, Stephanie Jones and Ralph Shaw.
Staff present: Robert Sherman, Agent, Lori A. Soucy, Assistant Agent, and Frances Wise, Board Secretary
Jack Fitzsimmons, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 6:55 p.m.
Public Hearing: None.
Non-Hearing Agenda
Old Business:
1. Candidates for Conservation Commission. Bob did not have a chance to contact the two candidates over the holidays, but he will check on their availability year-around.
2. Waquoit Bay. Bob showed a photo of a huge algal washup on a Waquoit Bay beach. He said this is the first time we’ve had this problem in winter, indicating that it’s now a year-around problem. Lori said that last year there was a seaweed problem on Waquoit Bay and Seconsett Island, and Bob and she want to start doing something about this problem now. The Town dump won’t take it.
Bob said we are not requiring denitrification for two-bedroom homes now, but maybe we should require it for all homes regardless of size. This won’t solve the problem, but it will slow it down.
Jack asked why WBNERR isn’t helping more. Bob and Michael said they are performing their role well. Michael said there is no composting program, which would be an obvious way to deal with it. Lori said she has spoken with the Health Department and they suggested we send a letter to the Selectmen proposing a composting program.
Michael would like to propose to the Selectmen that the Town sponsor an educational effort to explain how the waterfront properties could be managed better regarding nutrient loading.
3. MACC Annual Conference. Bob distributed the program to the members and recommended they submit their application to Pauline by the following Friday.
4. Regulations Sub-Committee. Bob will contact the members next week to set up a meeting.
New Business:
1. Falmouth Conservation Commission. Michael said, the Conservation Agent in Falmouth, expressed an interest in meeting with this Commission (sit in on our regulations meetings, for example) to discuss common issues and share methods of correction.
Regarding enforcement orders, Michael said in Falmouth they have set up a monitoring program where the owner must pay an independent consultant to do the monitoring. Our doing this would take some of the workload off of us. Bob said we sometimes do this and it’s a good idea, but a database needs to be set up to track compliance. As of now, the database is haphazard. Bob said this Commission could readily have a person working fulltime on enforcement compliance.
Hearing Agenda
7:00 p.m., Richard Mark and Maura Harway, 45 Santuit Lane (septic system upgrade)
David LaJoie represented the applicant. Bob recommended approval.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve the plan.
7:05 p.m., Donald Jacobs, 123 Waterway (installation of new septic system repair/upgrade). Bob described the plan and recommended approval.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve the plan.
7:10 p.m., Victor Corda, 190 Waterway (mitigation landscaping plantings). Tom Jalowy represented the applicant and described the project. Jack asked about the removal of a large pine tree. Bob said the planting of five eastern white cedar trees more than makes up for it, and he recommended approval.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve the plan.
7:15 p.m., Mashpee Water District, Amos Landing, Wood Road, West Way and East Way (installation of a water main). Lynn Hamlyn represented the applicant and described the project.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve the plan.
7:20 p.m., Babette E. Liebman, 86 Summersea Road (continued from 12/1/03). Michael Grotzke represented the applicant and described the project. Bob raised the following issues: 1) The plan does not show the resource area, 2) Bob, Cass and Lori were at the site that day, they measured from one work-limit stake to the nearest wetland stake and it was 34 ft, not 35. Because of this and the fact that it is such a tight lot to begin with, Bob recommended that the Commission request a second opinion on the wetland line, 3) During the construction phase, the workers will be only two feet from the work limit, and the burden of proof is on the applicant to prove that the work procedure will ensure the stability of the bank, 4) The plan does not show containment of roof run-off, 5) We would need engineering plans for any
retaining wall over five ft. high, 6) If we permitted the project, the plan would have to include double staked hay bales with silt screen and weekly monitoring of erosion control, the hay bales to have plywood backing by the 35 ft. zone and maybe by the steep slope, 7) Depending on where this project goes, Bob recommended that the Commission require a Wildlife Habitat Evaluation under the provisions of the Wetlands Act, Section 10.24.1.
Michael said he thought it should be clearly understood that we have had a very consistent policy of treating coastal banks as significant resource areas, and actually have used the 50 ft buffer from the top of a coastal bank as the guideline by which we judge where there can be impacts. For us to even contemplate the idea of allowing an entire project on a coastal bank is a difficult precedent to consider.
Bob said the Commission would select the consultant to do the independent evaluation and the applicant would have to pay for it, but Mr. Grotzke would have access through the Commission to ask that consultant questions.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to authorize the Agent to hire a consultant to do a Wildlife Habitat Evaluation of the property under the provisions of the Wetlands Act, Section 10.24.1.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to grant a continuance to 2/5/04 at 7:05 p.m., at the request of the applicant.
7:25 p.m., James and Anne LaGrippe, 15 Ocean Bluff Drive (retaining wall, landscaping grading, patio renovation.) Michael Grotzke represented the applicant. Bob described the project and said 1) he’s not sure if mitigation can be done on one side as planned and 2) the larger issue is that a violation on the site has not been corrected. Bob and Mike Talbot will meet at the site with Mr. Grotzke to discuss mitigation plantings. Regarding a proposed fieldstone wall, Mike Talbot said we will need a narrative giving construction details that will guarantee there will be no impact beyond the work limit, which is literally only 1” away from the proposed wall.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to grant a continuance to 1/22/04 at 7:20 p.m., at the request of the applicant.
7:30 p.m., Gary Locarno, 51 Waterline Drive (vista pruning with maintenance in perpetuity and mitigation plantings). Michael Grotzke represented the applicant. Bob described the plan and recommended approval with the condition that 1) a final revegetation plan is agreed upon, and 2) any future violations of the applicant will result in an irrevocable withdrawal of any further vista pruning privileges.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve the plan with the condition that 1) a final revegetation plan is agreed upon, 2) a provision is made for monitoring the plantings for at least two years, the monitoring to be done by an independent consultant hired by the Commission and paid for by the owner, and 3) any future violations by the owner will result in an irrevocable withdrawal of any further vista pruning privileges.
Meeting adjourned at 8:31 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Frances Wise, Board Secretary
| 
