MASHPEE CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Minutes of March 3, 2005
Public Hearing
Mashpee Town Hall Meeting Room 1
Commissioners present: Michael Talbot, Vice Chairman, Len Pinaud, Clerk, Lloyd Allen, Cass Costa, and Jeffrey Cross.
Staff present: Bob Sherman, Agent, Steven Solbo, Assistant Agent, and Frances Wise, Board Secretary.
Michael Talbot, Vice Chairman, called the meeting to order at 6:45 p.m.
Public Hearing:
1. Bob said the Regulations Subcommittee recommended that continuation fees be raised to $100 when continuances are deemed to be avoidable. No one from the public was present.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to raise continuation fees to $100 when continuances are deemed to be avoidable.
2. Bob distributed to the members “Rules for Hiring Outside Consultants under GL Chapter 44, Section 53G” which reflect a slight change from those which were presented to the members at the February 17th meeting. No one from the public was present.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to adopt the revised “Rules for Hiring Outside Consultants” and to incorporate it in GL Chapter 44, Section 53G.
Non-Hearing Agenda
Old Business:
1. Vista Pruning Extension. Bob recommended extending the vista-pruning season to the end of March.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve the extension for vista pruning to March 31st.
2. RFAA-SE-43-2126, Thomas Smith, 226 Monomoscoy Road. Bob said that Edward Pesce, engineer for Mr. Smith, is requesting a lot of changes – a new electric service, an addition on the front of the house, a longer dock, and repair of deck in front of boathouse. Bob thinks a lot of these requests are not appropriate for an administrative review or even for an amended order. The guidance for an amended order is quite specific, i.e., does it present a greater threat to the interests of the Act. Bob thinks a longer dock would. He recommended we accept items 1, 2, 4 and 5 as an amended order, and require an NOI for the longer dock.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve items 1, 2, 4 and 5 as an amended order and to require an NOI for the longer dock.
3. Regulations Sub-Committee. Bob recommended that we wait until the next meeting to decide on a date for the next meeting.
4. Santuit Dam. Bob said this is Town land, not Conservation land. Steve has been researching grants for the reconstruction of this failing dam, and he distributed to the members his memo to Joyce Mason outlining the role that the Conservation Department would be taking on behalf of the Town/ Board of Selectmen. Bob said that he, Steve and Perry Ellis met with Joyce Mason on this major issue, and Joyce agreed that we don’t want to keep putting this off. Bob said we have about $22,000 in the Conservation Fund, and it would be totally appropriate to use money from this fund for this purpose under Chapter 48C, which instructs us to take charge of leaking watershed resource issues. Bob told Joyce he would ask the Commission if they are willing to appropriate $10,000 from this fund towards
the engineering fee, which will probably be about $45,000. There was discussion about using almost half the amount in the fund for this issue without a foreseeable tangible way of replacing it. We would be saying this is seed money, and the remainder will have to come from elsewhere. We would not commit the $10,000 until we have a funding source for the remainder. Chuckie Green is also aware of the severity of the problem. Bob will call Delahunt’s office the following morning.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to appropriate a maximum of $10,000 from the Conservation Fund towards the engineering fee contingent upon a clear show that the remainder is forthcoming.
New Business: None.
Hearing Agenda
7:00 p.m., Thomas Smith, 15 Horseshoe Bend Way (continued from 2/03/05).
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to grant a continuance to March 17th at 7:20
p.m., at the request of the applicant.
7:05 p.m. Shoestring Bay Realty Trust, 23 Shoestring Bay Road (relocate upper section of stairs and walkway, addition of retaining wall, and installation of mitigation plantings). Michael Grotzke represented the applicant and distributed to the members the new plan. Steve reviewed our previous requirements and recommended approval of the new plan. Mike specified various plantings.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve this Amended Order of Conditions.
7:10 p.m., John Malloy, 196 Wading Place Road (continued from 2/17/05). Steve said there are some shellfish and water depth issues.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to grant a continuance to March 17th at 7:15
p.m., at the request of the applicant.
7:15 p.m., Robert Najarian, 8 Bowsprit Point (continued from 2/17/05). Robert Gray represented the applicant and described the plan. He said his client would prefer to not use Rodeo herbicide to control the phragmites. Steve said he has been handling this application and he may have made a misjudgment on the vista corridor and the past precedents of the Commission. He said he went by the rules, which don’t specifically state in the vista pruning guidelines that if you have an existing view corridor, you are not allowed to have another one, so he went on that premise and approved the plan. Bob and he have discussed some possible changes to rectify the situation to the laws, and one is to replace the low growing shrubs with trees.
Cass cited the obtuse angle of the property. Mike said he recently saw the site and there is approximately a 75-100 ft. wide-open vista corridor, with the exception of the phragmites. He said we have had a very clear policy that if there is an existing corridor; a view corridor that an applicant wishes to put on record would have to be within that existing corridor. The corridor being shown on the plan happens to correspond with the only section of that buffer zone that has any canopy plants whatsoever. He would be very reluctant to accept another corridor without completely revegetating the rest of that buffer zone. That has been our precedent.
Bob said Cass has a point, in that if you measure the vista corridor on a 100 ft. scale, it should be 25, and it’s 32.
Mike said the simplest remedy would be to redraw the corridor to correspond to the existing vista corridor. Another issue is the phragmites. Even though they are considered an invasive species, they do now perform a very important function. They stabilize the soil, provide a certain amount of storm protection, and provide habitat for some species. It’s not the Rodeo treatment that’s important to this Commission. If the phragmites are going to be removed, something else will have to be put in their place. If the applicant wants to mow it as a means of killing it and put something from the native plant community in its place, that would be fine. But to simply mow it would mean leaving that area vulnerable. He said we have had experience with applying the Rodeo
treatment by hand where there is very low impact, and it allows the native plant community to replace it. Taking the route of mowing, it probably would have to be mowed a lot more than twice a year, and it would have to be replaced with plantings that would continue to perform the functions of wildlife habitats and storm water protection, which are important issues of the buffer zone. We would entertain that route.
Mr. Gray said the plan was produced in good faith between the staff and Jim McManus, the landscape architect. He suggested that the Commission craft into the Order of Conditions exactly what is permittable. They don’t want to have to continue to revise the plan again. They could agree that the view corridor be shifted over and drawn to the right dimensions. Bob said Mr. Gray could draw the corridor on the present plan and sign it. Mike said we could close pending receipt of an accepted revised plan, at which time we will write an Order of Conditions.
Mr. Gray said the former owner had cut the phragmites from 2-3 ft. from the surface, and that’s the type of cutting the applicant is looking for. Mike said the vista pruning guidelines state that understory plants and shrubs (in this case it’s phragmites) can only be cut to 5 ft., because these understory shrubs provide travel corridors for birds, so it would have to be within that guideline. Also, that would maintain the health of the plant, which is performing a function. Mr. Gray agreed to this and said he will alert the work crew to not cut the native shrubs growing mongst the phragmites.
Steve summarized that the corridor will be moved, the dead pine tree will be removed and replaced with a cedar and shadbush, the mitigation planting will not be necessary since the willows will not be removed, the cherry trees can be limbed pending a pre-work on-site, the perennial bed in the middle of the lawn will be removed.
Mike suggested switch grass or other native grasses instead of beach grass, and since the pine represents the only roosting area for about 150 ft., he would like it to remain for a couple of years.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve the plan pending the receipt of an acceptable revised plan.
7:20 p.m., Chilton Development Co., Inc., 166 Waterway (continued from 2/17/05). Cass stepped down from this hearing. Michael Grotzke represented the applicant Steve remarked that the plan presented at the last meeting showed the pool and patio on the coastal bank. Mr. Grotzke has moved the pool, patio and retaining wall to the front of the coastal bank. The work limit is 5 ft. below the top of the coastal bank, but will be revegetated back to the retaining wall. Mike commended Mr. Grotzke for the new plan and list of plants.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve the plan.
7:25 p.m., Jason Stone, 23 Shoestring Bay Road (continued from 2/17/05). Michael Grotzke represented the applicant and described the plan. Bob recommended that we approve the vista pruning to be done this year pending receipt of a paid bill from a qualified landscaper representing the plan that we approved.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve the plan pending receipt of a paid bill from a qualified landscaper representing the specific plan that we approved.
7:30 p.m., James Crocker, Jr., Trustee, 14 Sampson’s Mill Road (continued from 2/17/05). Amy Ball represented the applicant. Steve said Horsley and Whitten and Amy have achieved the 35 ft. line and provided everything we requested, and he recommended approval based on an official contract for the monitoring for various substances. Mike said we should note that these are proved technologies which have been used elsewhere in the country.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve the plan,
7:35 p.m., Robert and Syrul Lurie, 29 Shoestring Bay Road (construct a fixed pier, observation deck, ramp and float with access stairs/pathway). Amy Ball represented the applicant and described the plan. They will consult with the Harbormaster regarding the water depth and boat. Steve said he couldn’t verify the wetland boundaries because of the snow.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to grant a continuance to March 17th at 7:30
p.m., at the request of the applicant.
7:40 p.m., Mews Village Committee, Mid-Iron Way (remove or prune trees and replace trees).
Steve described the plan, which included replacing a tree with one shrub. Mike said that the tree to be removed should be shown on the plan, and it should be replaced with three shrubs, not one.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to grant a continuance to March 17th at 7:35
p.m., providing that the applicant agrees to this continuation. If not, he will have to file a NOI.
Meeting adjourned at 8:14 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Frances Wise, Board Secretary
| 
