MASHPEE CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Minutes of May 17, 2007
Public Hearings
Mashpee Town Hall Meeting Room I
Commissioners present: Jack Fitzsimmons (Chairman), Ralph Shaw (Vice-Chairman), Lloyd Allen, Len Pinaud, Jeffrey Cross & John Rogers
Staff present: Drew McManus (Assistant Conservation Agent)
Jack Fitzsimmons called the meeting to order at 6:55 p.m.
Post Hearing Agenda:
1. Administrative Approval (SE 43-2335) Lurie, 29 Shoestring Bay Rd: The agent described the request for administrative approval to add a proposed wall, to reinforce landscaping, and provide an access area for the upper platform of the pre-approved walkover structure. Implementation of the wall would call for the removal of a 6” oak. Jeff Cross determined that the information submitted and work being called for should require an amended order filing and that the contractor should be present to describe the project in detail. Jack Fitzsimmons agreed.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to deny this administrative approval
2. Minutes from 4/19/07 to be approved
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve minutes from 4/19/07
3. Shields property
The agent requested a vote by the conservation commission to approve the purchase of a 1.09-acre lot adjacent to the Lopez Conservation Area off Meetinghouse Rd. Jack Fitzsimmons and Ralph Shaw inquired about a strip of land in between the Lopez property and the parcel up for sale. The vote was postponed until information could be furnished as to what purpose this strip of land is going to be used for.
Hearing Agenda:
7:00 p.m. Nancy and Richard Cook, 401 Monomoscoy Rd (NOI): The agent informed the commission that this had been continued 3 times, and all submittal requirements have been met (new plans, abutter re-notification, zoning board). Jack asked for commentary, and one of the abutters (name not given) had expressed concerns that she had applied for a dock/pier and was denied. The abutter questioned why this dock/pier was up for approval when hers was denied (she lives on the next lot over). The agent explained that each case is different, and there was not enough information present before the commission to address her concerns (her case). The agent informed her that she could come to the conservation office to review her filing.
Mr. Webster (abutter) asked to look at the plan for the project to clarify location of the dock/pier. Mr Borseli (Falmouth Engineering) showed Mr. Webster the plan and location of the dock/pier. Mr. Francour (abutter) asked about 2 poles currently in the water at the project site. Mr. Borseli informed Mr. Francour that the poles are used to mark the most seaward boundaries of the proposed float. The agent recommended approval.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to close and issue
7:03 p.m. Peninsula Council Inc, 98 Waterway (RDA): The agent described the project as a request for vista pruning and reiterated that the filing is an RDA and thus does not carry maintenance in perpetuity. Jeff Cross stated that the boundaries for the peninsula area are not clearly defined (where association land meets private land) and should be assessed prior to any vista pruning. The agent described the pruning as light clearing of vines, and trimming of Rosa rugosa…no removal of trees. The applicants did not show up for the hearing, and hence, the defined areas of the peninsula could not be verified (lack of information).
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried for a positive determination.
7:06 p.m. Angelo DiCenso, 15 Seconsett Point Rd (RDA): The agent described the project as a removal of existing shed and section of existing dwelling with addition of garage with living space above. Board of Health is in receipt of application and has no issues. Mr. DiCenso (applicant) described the area as disturbed, and all the changes are set back further from the resource area (coastal bank). The agent recommended approval.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried for a negative determination.
7:09 p.m. Ed Govoni, 12 Quinapen Rd (NOI): Continuance. John Slavinsky (Cape and Islands Engineering) represented the client and described the project. The project calls for removal of existing structure and construction of single family home on site. The site is entirely disturbed and borders the Childs River. Mr. Slavinsky informed the Commission that ivy is growing along the fence and trees that border the river, and he and Steve Solbo had agreed that the ivy should be removed by hand and replaced with native plantings to protect the riverbank and impede the growth of ivy. The proposed house is outside 50 feet from the river’s edge. The agent described the project with plantings as an upgrade to the area. Lloyd Allen inquired as to how the ivy
was going to be eliminated, and Mr. Slavinsky confirmed it was going to be removed by hand, and no herbicides would be used. Lloyd Allen recommended that the area of ivy growth be covered over with black tarps after cutting to help ensure that ivy will be eliminated. The agent recommended approval.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to close and issue
7:12 p.m. Jim Quigley, 376 Monomoscoy Rd (RDA): John Slavinsky (Cape and Islands Engineering) represented the client and described the project: Construction and maintenance of 12’X16’ deck. The lot is entirely in the flood zone, and no removal of vegetation is necessary (area of proposed deck part grass/mix bluestone). The agent recommended approval.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried for a negative determination.
7:15 p.m. Joseph Cariglia, 64 Triton Way.(AOC): Holmes and McGrath represented the client and described the project. The project calls for the clearing of an access path through Mr. Cariglia’s property to finish the revetment wall behind the house. Jack Fitzsimmons questioned why Mr. Cariglia could not use the existing easement between his house and Mr. Baudanza’s house. The representative informed the commission that because Mr. Cariglia initially had work performed without a permit (an after the fact filing was completed), New Seabury Properties had closed off access to Mr. Cariglia. Because the revetment work needs to be finished to address severe erosion concerns, Mr. Cariglia has proposed a new access path through his own property. Jack Fitzsimmons
questioned what the status is with the easement between Mr. Badanza and Mr. Cariglia. Jack expressed concerns with the existing gap between the two revetment walls and what needs to be done to bridge this gap. Jack also questioned who will be doing the mitigation for the easement. The agent told the commission that the plan to connect the revetment walls is still on going and he will supply the commission with information as it comes in. The representative from Holmes and McGrath laid out the landscape plan to mitigate for what will be lost in construction of a new pathway. The plan calls for the removal of two 4” pines, which are to be replaced with two 2” black pines. Jack Fitzsimmons informed the representative that mitigation calls for replacement of what’s lost in kind. The representative agreed to replace the two pines with 4” black pines instead of 2” black pines. The agent recommended
approval.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve the amended order.
Meeting adjourned at 7:50 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Drew McManus, Assistant Conservation Agent
Mashpee Conservation Dept.
| 
