MASHPEE CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Minutes of July 6, 2006
Public Hearings
Mashpee Town Hall Meeting Room 1
Commissioners present: Jack Fitzsimmons, Chairman, Michael Talbot, Vice Chairman, Lloyd Allen, Cass Costa, Jeffrey Cross, and Ralph Shaw.
Staff present: Steve Solbo, Agent, Drew McManus, Assistant Agent, and Frances Wise, Board Secretary
Jack Fitzsimmons, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 6:55 p.m.
Public Comment: None.
Non-Hearing Agenda
Old Business: None.
New Business:
1. “No mow lawns become popular for second and suburban homes” article from Cape Cod Times, 6/11/06. Drew distributed a copy of this article to the members.
2. Blue Ribbon Committee update. Drew distributed to the members a memo dated 6/16/06 from John Miller.
3. Blue Ribbon Committee future meeting dates. Drew distributed this list to the members.
4. Signage for Conservation land. Drew said he and Steve are looking into signage for “No Dumping” and “No ATV’s.” They will be 30 ft. high to hopefully prevent destruction of them by vandals.
5. Mashpee Police ATV’s. Steve said he spoke with the Police Department and was told that it is not their policy to send out one person only to a site. Steve thinks we should purchase another ATV for them to monitor the Conservation land. Our account for this now has about $70,000 but that should increase to almost $350,000 in October. Jeff recommended that we investigate purchasing an ATV from the Drug Enforcement Agency. .
6. Approval of Minutes for 6/8/06.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve the minutes for 6/8/06.
Hearing Agenda
7:00 p.m., Francis Reavey, 42 Cayuga Avenue (continued from 6/8/06). This filing is awaiting comment from Natural Heritage.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to grant a continuance to August 17th at 7:00 p.m., at the request of the applicant.
7:05 p.m., Ellen Walsh, 4 Sagamore Road (construct new screen porch with the conversion of existing porch to habitable space and the installation of mitigation plantings). The Board of Health has insufficient information on this project, so it was continued.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to grant a continuance to July 20th at 7:25 p.m., at the request of the applicant.
7:10 p.m., Betty Fulton, 5 Point Road (single family residence with associated appurtenances). Dan Johnson represented the applicant. Steve described the plan and said he thinks that all our performance standards have been met, but there is a concern that the project is on the bank. Michael said that for him to consider building on the coastal bank we would have to have a landscape plan that would be a plant community restoration on that site. He asked what is presently growing there. Mr. Johnson said some decent size pines, sweet pepperbush, etc. Mr. Johnson said there is no coastal bank involved by the Mashpee definition.
Robert Delory Jr., representing Robert Delory, Sr., an abutter, 3 Bay Road, questioned if the lot is buildable. Originally, it was one lot, and then they made it into two lots. Steve said that is a Building Board issue.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to grant a continuance to July 20th at 7:30 p.m., at the request of the applicant.
7:15 p.m., Michael and Beth Moskowitz, 146 Popponesset Island Road (replace existing ramp with a 3x30 ft. ramp, reposition two existing piles, rotate second float and install four new piles).
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to grant a continuance to July 20th at 7:20 p.m., at the request of the applicant.
7:20 p.m., Robert Stow, 25 Monomoscoy Road (continued from 6/22/06). John Slavinsky represented the applicant. Steve read for the record the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act, Regulation 10.24, Section 5A. He then said that under the Mashpee Bylaw and the State, we don’t have grounds to deny this project because this structure meets the performance standards for land over a salt marsh. It’s a typical cookie-cutter walkway, and this Commission will order that this structure will have no vessels on it, tethered or otherwise, or any vessels associated with it in any other way unless they are contained upland of the structure itself outside the ACEC. Also, it is to be removed upland of the ACEC or an enforcement order will be issued.
Kathryn Wood, an abutter, requested clarification on some issues and received same.
Albert Laughton, an abutter, asked where the walkway ends in relation to the Mosquito Control Commission. Steve said if a mosquito trench were in a resource area, it would have to be shown on this plan, but he doesn’t think that this mosquito trench is a resource area per se. Mr. Laughton said his concern is if the walk ends in the middle of the marsh, how people could possibly get beyond the mosquito control trench because it is deep and wide. Michael said it is 5 ft. above the marsh. Steve recommended grating from the ACEC line down to the bottom of the walkway.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve this NOI with the condition that 50% open grating is required from the ACEC line to the platform.
7:25 p.m., Town of Mashpee, Riverside Road (continued from 6/22/06). Steve said he opened this hearing at the last meeting, but he kept the discussion closed so that this presentation is being heard by the commissioners for the first time tonight. Catherine Laurent represented the applicant. She submitted for the record a copy of the road layout plan from 1965 which shows Riverside Road extending all the way down to the mean high water, which she believes was extended to provide some sort of ramp for boat access. She also presented photos of what remains of the broken up asphalt and concrete in the water, which is a liability concern.
She said that in August 2005 they approached the Conversation Agent because of the safety and liability concern for the Town, and were told they would not be able to do that without replacing the asphalt and concrete with something to protect the bank and tie into the tube adjacent for a structure on either side of the layout. They hired an engineer and worked with Conservation, Waterways, and the Harbormaster to come up with a plan that meets their criteria. They wanted to limit access to pedestrians, whether it be fisherman or those launching a canoe or kayak, and have something that was low maintenance for the Town. The design they came up with is a tiered structure made of pre-cast concrete blocks which is fine for salt water application that would span the width of where the asphalt and concrete is,
and extend to the bank to stabilize it. Also, the tiers would allow them to plant on either side of the 4 ft. access to discourage misuse of the structure.
Steve believes this structure would not only enhance wildlife habitat, but also give us access to the water and thus increase the recreation value, so with the plantings and improved access, and eliminating the safety concerns, we are getting a plus-plus situation on both the environmental side and the recreation side. It is a very easily permitted project from the Wetlands Protection Act standpoint and the Town Bylaw standpoint. He believes this forum should be limited to the discussion of those two issues only.
Lloyd asked about access. Steve said it looks like an area that could become susceptible to a gate situation, but it’s a Town-owned road. Michael said the one disadvantage of this plan is that it does not permit easy access to people with a disability. The only way to mitigate that would be have a ramp stretched down to the terrace. This is something he would want to look at carefully.
Jack asked for comments on this application from the audience, but pointed out that this Commission is only concerned with the Wetlands Protection Act and the Mashpee Bylaws.
Mark Burtis, Little River Boatyard, represented his brother Jon, who is an abutter, and himself in a roundabout way as an abutter of a shellfish ranch 150 yards from this site. He said concrete barriers do not work. He doesn’t think they would withstand the velocity of the northeast storms that come in there. He has replaced four concrete barriers in that general vicinity with bulk head walls. He said there is no asphalt down there – it’s all left-over concrete that trucks dumped there after filling a foundation. The DPW recommended this dumping in the old days. His method is using a standard Navy vinyl-sheeting wall going down a lot more than 18”. He said all the concrete barriers there have collapsed and are in the ponds. Ms. Laurent said the plan
was developed by a professional engineer.
Michael said that as long as the blocks are well connected, that’s a pretty solid mass setting back into the bank.
Mr. Burtis said an identical concrete block can be seen around the corner of Route 130 at the end of the driveway of the old sandpit. Jack asked if Coastal Zone Management could advise us, and Steve said yes, and the Cooperative Extension could probably help us also. He said Mr. Burtis has a good point as someone who has lived in the area for years and is familiar with how a storm goes through there. Jack recommended we have a continuation and have an engineer from Coastal Zone Management present. Ms. Laurent asked if that is something we could do before the next meeting. Jack said that would be all right. Steve said the Cooperative Extension has an engineer on staff who deals specifically with Conservation issues and maybe we should entertain consulting with him. It wouldn’t be
the Town engineer who was hired to do this project against the party represented here today. It would be a third party.
Mr. Burtis said this plan involves a gigantic excavation in the tidal zone -- a huge conservation issue. He’s concerned about the velocity of the runoff which will result, and the abutters should be concerned about what’s going to happen to the sidelines of the property from the velocity of the storm water running down. He said a simple Navy wall is a lot cheaper than this plan and a lot less invasive as far as the digging is concerned. They will be digging pre-existing plantings – rosa ragosa and all kinds of mini roses which are not shown on this plan.
Steve said that a vertical construction is not allowed in our Bylaw. It would have to be tapered somehow. Mr. Burtis said the natural slope there now has been doing fine. He could build a wall a very minimum height – about 4 ft. He and his neighbors are not against this project – they actually brought the situation to the Town’s attention. However, they are concerned about what’s going to happen to the sidelines of their property, the expense to the taxpayers of Mashpee, and the extent of the digging that would take place, because this plan would require a tremendous amount of digging. There is no shellfish in the area that’s going to be dug, but there’s plenty in the siltation zone where the excavation would take place.
Greg Perry, 37 Riverside Drive, said this road is very narrow, so when cars park on the side it is almost impossible for another car to pass through. His concerns are that this plan will increase the traffic on the road and if followed, the road should be widened. Also, the plan would be a waste of tax dollars. Steve said this commission is charged strictly with looking after environmental concerns.
Charles Linsky, 70 Riverside Drive. A couple of years ago they put in a new septic system and met all the setbacks. If they take away land, he will have a breakout issue with the septic. Steve said that is not our purview.
Dan Bonenberg, resident of 43 Riverside Road since 1973. He said an excavation of this size will have a huge environmental impact. It’s always been a small fishermen’s right-of-way. This plan does not preserve the integrity of the Town.
John Slavinsky, retained by Mr. Burtis, said 1) the existing timber bulkhead will be partially removed. The existing timber bulkhead is all in the mean high water. This plan ends at the mean high water. How will they remove the licensed timber bulkhead that is below the mean high water. Ms. Laurent said that’s something that Town Counsel will look at when we get to the point of construction. Steve said the methodology and deconstruction of that portion may come under our purview.
Mr. Slavinsky said 2) In order to develop a plan for Mr. Burtis, he needs to know the following which is not on the plan: a) the mean high water line, b) the work limits, c) the amount of excavation that’s going to come out, d) how this excavation is going to be sustained, and
e) they would be excavating 6 ½ ft. deep only 6” away from Mr. Armotto’s property and Mr. Burtis’s property, the two abutters, and how would they keep their property from caving in?
Steve said he wants to know where were the plans and implementation methodology of the construction that went in over the winter illegally. Mr. Slavinsky said it’s a licensed timber bulkhead. Steve said he still needs a permit, whether it be an RDA or whatever.
Michael said Mr. Slavinsky has brought up a valid point. Without an adequate construction methodology, we need to know how those areas will be shored, how silt sedimentation will be prevented. He assumes that that will be very clearly spelled out in any proposal for an excavation that deep. Mr. Slavinsky said this work limit is on the property line, and the excavation shown is 6 ½ ft. deep 6” away from his property.
Jack said he would like to have a plan where an expert says this is the best solution, and he would look to the Coastal Zone Management for that.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to grant a continuance to July 20 at 7:25 p.m., at the request of the applicant.
7:30 p.m., Matthew Mase, 11 Pontiac Road (include a landscape plan). Mr. Mase was present. Steve described the plan. Mr. Mase will follow Michael’s recommendation on the lawn seed. Steve recommended that we limit the lawn to 1,200 sq. ft.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve this AOC with the condition that the turf installation meet the Mashpee guidelines.
7:35 p.m., Anthony and Jacqueline Baudanza, 70 Triton Way (revetment reconstruction and maintenance). Tara Marden represented the applicant and presented the plan. They will not have to reset the toe stones.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve this NOI.
Meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Frances Wise, Board Secretary
| 
