Mashpee Conservation Commission
Minutes of April 16, 2009
Public Hearings
Mashpee Town Hall
Present: Vice Chairman Ralph Shaw, Mark Gurnee, Lloyd Allen, John Rogers, Jeff Cross, Len Pinaud, Cass Costa
Also Present: Conservation Agent-Drew McManus
The meeting was called to order with a quorum by Vice Chairman Shaw at 6:55 pm.
There was no public comment.
Pre/Post Hearing Agenda
1) Administrative Approval: SE 43-2500
Alan Clapp, brother-in-law of the applicant, addressed the Commission regarding the original approval of the project. When Mr. Tavares originally presented the project, he was unaware of plans to create a dog pen to be accessed from the home’s cellar door. Mitigation, totally 559 square feet, was proposed very close to the home. Mr. Clapp is proposing that a portion of the mitigation be relocated closer to the resource area, maintaining the same total amount, but allowing the addition of a chain link fence in the cellar door area and small stone pathway leading to the deck. Regarding the 286 square foot of mitigation in the parking area, the applicant proposes to relocate the plantings closer to the coastal bank and near other mitigation plantings. Mr. Clapp wishes to
move previously approved stones closer to the parking area, keeping people on pathways closer to the house. Agent McManus clarified that plantings have not yet been placed in the ground and agrees that the adjustments make sense, further stating that the preference is to place mitigation closer to the resource areas. The applicant will also be reducing the parking area by one space.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve SE 43-2500.
2) Approval of Minutes from March 19, 2009
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to Approve the Minutes of March 19, 2009
3) DEP Superceding OOC onsite for 188/192 Wheeler Road, Kiliulus Ceslovas
Agent McManus attended the onsite visit with the DEP yesterday at Mr. Ceslovas’ property. Agent McManus referenced the differences between the DEP’s definition of the coastal bank at the edge of water in contrast with Mashpee’s Chapter 172 definition measuring the coastal bank from the beginning of the top of the slope to the resource area. During a superceding onsite the DEP considers only their area of jurisdiction and does not consider the local bylaw. The Agent explained the situation to the DEP representative regarding the difference in calculations for the amount of mitigation and spacing of the mitigation, as well as the applicant’s request for a decision rather than consulting a third party to verify the plans. Agent McManus also described the tree
removal creating significant damage to wildlife habitat and that the trees removed on the bank compromises bank stability. The DEP will contact the Agent with their decision. Agent McManus is hopeful that the mitigation plans will remain with their decision.
4) DEP Superceding OOC onsite for 29 Hamblin Road, formerly Spohr but now Proulx
No COC had been issued for the property. The agent for DEP examined the hardscape, elevated patio and associated deck and determined that there was no impact and that the structure could remain. However, the original plan called for mitigation in the area where the patio currently exists. Agent McManus further investigated and discovered that the patio had been approved by an RDA despite not having a COC. No further details were available in the minutes. The RDA did not include the plan but Cape and Islands provided the plan that matches the existing patio. Additionally, a pathway leading to the pathway was approved by the Commission.
DEP has now issued the COC.
5) Garner Farley Bog RFP
Agent McManus met with the Town Manager’s office to further discuss the RFPs utilizing an evaluation criterion sheet with a rating scale of advantageous, not advantageous and highly advantageous. Following the review it was determined that Quaker Run ranked not advantageous and Handy Cranberry Trust not advantageous and Fairland Farms ranked highly advantageous. All points were addressed in Fairland Farm’s RFP, excluding positive references, which have since been received from the towns of Sharon and Falmouth. Agent McManus stated that if the Commission chooses to approve the Fairland Farms RFP, they will take over the Garner Farley Bog. After the bog is prepped for 2-3 years, price quote percentages are 10% for the first year and 20% for the second and third year.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to Approve the RFP from Fairland Farms.
Agent McManus will notify the other growers about the Commission’s decision.
Hearing Agenda
7:00 The Trust of the Cotuit Bay Condominium, NOI – 418 Quinaquisset Avenue (Vista pruning/vegetation control)
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried for a Continuance until 5/28/09 at 7:03 pm.
7:03 Shane Caiazzo, NOI – 8 Chart Way (Demo/construct house, bulkhead repair) (Continued from 3/19/09)
Jack Vaccaro of Vaccaro Consulting, along with Mark Burtis of Little River Boatyard and architect Tim Luft of Architect Associates, were present to represent the applicant. The project was initially introduced to the Commission on March 19. The applicant is proposing to demolish the current single family home located on a knoll and replace with a new home. Portions of the new structure will be located further back from the water and 100 linear feet of the bulkhead along Popponessett Creek will be backfilled to prevent further slumping. The Commission expressed initial concerns and asked that other options be considered for the property, such as reducing the hardscape and reducing impact on the coastal bank. A meeting with the Agent occurred to discuss additional ideas about the project.
As a result, the applicant has eliminated the lower level garage and driveway located on the coastal bank. A two car garage is proposed at the site of the existing driveway. The applicant was also asked to reduce the size of the pool and patio. Currently, a deck extends from the home with a concrete patio beneath it and the pool and patio has now been designed to fit into the existing footprint of the deck and patio. The house is larger due to the need for the 2 car garage on the single level, but in the direction away from the creek. In order to balance the increased size of the garage, space was reduced from the main part of the house. Mr. Cross questioned the expansion of the building over the coastal bank, noting that it appeared 20% of the structure extends into the bank. Mr. Vaccaro responded that the existing home is located on the coastal bank and further stated that not knowing what the location looked like before the current
house was built, it is not possible to know how much coastal bank was affected. Mr. Vaccaro stated that the entire length of the house occupies the coastal bank and that topographic surveys are limited for that area. Mr. Vaccaro distributed copies of a USGS topographic survey completed in 1939, and updated in 1949, indicating the isolated knoll and showing that the contours are consistent with the Mashpee GIS. Mr. Cross further questioned the steep area to which Mr. Vaccaro responded that it was the backside of the knoll on the landward facing side. The gradient of the site results in the coastal bank being located at the full height of the hill. Since it exceeds the 4 to 1 aspect, it defines a coastal bank in that particular situation. Mr. Vaccaro added that the area is a coastal bank based on DEP definition but that it does not provide flood protection other than possibly for this home only. This coastal bank also does not provide a
sediment source because it is not eroding and is stable. Agent McManus agrees with Mr. Vaccaro’s thoughts that the coastal bank does not provide flood protection or a sediment source. Agent McManus further stated that Mr. Vaccaro has provided a mitigation plan that will address any runoff issues at the location, which is currently sparsely vegetated, and enhance the coastal bank. The home is not mapped in a velocity zone. Agent McManus agreed that the project will encroach on the coastal bank based on the performance standards and further stated that a waiver of requirements from Chapter 172 Bylaw require 1) how compelling the need, 2) to what degree are normal standards being asked to be put aside and 3) to what degree will compensatory mitigation measures offset the impact of the project. Agent McManus believes that the applicant’s landscaping plan fits with the #3 criterion. As the Commission considers the project, the performance
standards are limited to wildlife habitat value and lot stability only. Agent McManus believes that the landscaping plan addresses those issues and recommends a Close and Issue.
Mr. Pinaud asked if there was a compelling need for the pool to which Agent McManus stated that the pool would be located on the existing footprint, where hardscaping currently exists. Mr. Pinaud further stated that if the pool was not on the property, the home could be shifted further off of the coastal bank. Mr. Allen asked if additional mitigation could be requested to which Agent McManus responded that more mitigation could always be requested, particularly by the resource area. Agent McManus wishes to see mitigation to create a buffer zone at the Bordering Vegetated Wetland facing out to Popponessett Creek, as well as using mitigation to stabilize the area along the bulkhead where there has been slumping. Mr. Cross questioned the level of the 2-car garage in comparison with the home and noted
a 7 foot drop. Mr. Vaccaro responded that architectural plans have not been submitted but that the 1st floor has been designed as a walkout. Two levels will be apparent from the Chart Way Side as compared to the three levels viewed creekside. The entering floor is elevation 17 and the garage is 5 feet lower to blend in with the contours of the land. The garage will stick out in the back corner but the slab elevation of the garage will be approximately 12 feet. Ms. Costa stated the standard as a 50 foot setback and expressed concern about the garage being placed within 26 feet of the BVW, an area that is presently undisturbed. Ms. Costa expressed concern about setting a precedent and stated that in extenuating circumstances the Commission has allowed 35 feet. Mr. Vaccaro responded that the garage will be located in a disturbed area, as noted in a photograph, to which Ms. Costa stated that the area was initially mulched, lawn and
trees. Ms. Costa agreed that the mitigation plan was a positive addition to the property. Mr. Pinaud stated that a good reason would be needed to justify an adjusted setback. Mr. Luft addressed the Commission regarding the challenges present on the site. In addition to environmental issues, Mr. Luft is dealing with zoning issues and seeking relief from the Zoning Board of Appeals for 10 feet. The project has been designed to adhere to the 40 foot setback arc from the cul-de-sac which is affecting the location of the garage. Additionally, they are working closely with New Seabury and neighbors. Mr. Luft has designed a modest 2-car garage and has made every effort to design the space in such a way that the home does not look so large. Mr. Vaccaro calculated the mitigation requirement as 2800 square feet which will be located on the creek side of the house and does not take into consideration of the phragmites which will be replaced with
bayberry. Mr. Vaccaro also submitted a photograph of the area that has been disturbed by dredging which was previously lawn and landscaped area, with the necessity to remove some trees and brush to allow the machinery access for the dredging. Mr. Pinaud questioned if the garage could be relocated to the other side of the house, to which Mr. Vaccaro stated the septic was sited in that area and no alternative was available. Mr. Pinaud asked if the garage was needed to which Mr. Vaccaro responded yes. The existing garage has been converted to living space. Commission members discussed their concerns with setting a precedence regarding the setback but also stated that the applicant has done a very good job addressing many of the concerns initially expressed by the Commission. Mr. Pinaud suggested options such as not building a garage or building a smaller home. Ms. Costa inquired about a freestanding garage, but Mr. Vaccaro, Mr. Luft and Mr.
Caizzo stated that a freestanding garage would not be an option due to zoning and neighbor considerations. Mr. Vaccaro further stated that mitigation ratios in the Regulations are quoted to the 10 foot setback suggesting that if the information is provided, there may already be a precedence established. The Vice Chair questioned if there were any additional compromises that could be made by the applicant to which Mr. Vaccaro suggested that more mitigation could be offered. Additional mitigation could be added to the unbuildable area to protect the BVW and possibly other areas but the applicant hopes to maintain a reasonable lawn in the back. In reference to the concern about precedence, Agent McManus stated that each lot, home, resource area has its own set of circumstances and the Commission should take into consideration whether or not the mitigation being offered is fair. Commission members discussed whether to request additional mitigation,
consider not allowing a garage or consider holding off on a decision until ZBA has issued a decision. The Commission discussed continuing the hearing in order to have plans submitted for additional mitigation plantings. The applicant agreed to a continuance.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to request a 2 week continuance to review additional mitigation.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried for a Continuance until 4/30/09 at 7:15 pm.
7:06 Anthony Ricci, RDA – 14 Pem Lane (ATF hot tub, proposed hardscape/landscaping)
Steven Sevina of Swimming Pool Design Company addressed the Commission regarding a portable hot tub that he installed near a pre-existing stone dust pathway with benches, on a 7x7 footprint of bluestone. The applicant wishes to add natural bluestone stepping stones around the hot tub area in place of the stone dust and relocate plantings within the 100 foot setback from the resource area. Agent McManus stated that the unpermitted hot tub was discovered during an on site visit. Barren areas around the hot tub will be hardscaped with landscaping added. Plantings will be moved closer to the buffer zone. Agent McManus sees no impact from the project and recommends a negative determination.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried for a Negative Determination.
7:09 Laurence and Laurie Gerber, NOI – 30 Ockway Bay Road (Construct a single family home, deck additions, proposed shed and vista pruning)
Ms. Costa recused herself from this hearing. Jack Vacarro of Vaccaro Consulting and Michael Talbott of Michael Talbott Associates represented the applicant. Plans were distributed to the Commission. Mr. Vaccaro described the 20 scale drawing that indicates all of the proposed activities on the property that is surrounded by wetland resource areas. The existing home is within 50 feet of the resource area in reference to the abandoned cranberry bog on the north side. The rear of the home is landscaped where shrubs have been removed, oak trees remain, native species added, but the ground was mulched during previous ownership. The project will include the addition of a garage on the west side of the house, a study to the back of the house along with a kitchen addition and a pool/cabana
addition on the east side of the house. Additionally, a large deck is proposed on the back along with a storage shed and at grade walkway by the salt marsh. The majority of the proposed additions are outside of the 50 foot zone. However, the rear corner of the garage and the study addition encroach slightly within the 50 foot zone. The shed will also be within 50 feet and the walkway will be within the resource area. Mr. Talbott stated that the required mitigation calculation totals 1200 square feet but that the applicant is proposing 3300 square feet of mitigation. In particular, a steep bank by the driveway will include groundcover and trees. Along the salt marsh, much of the area will be allowed to grow back but some Cyprus trees will be removed and holly and buffer zone plants will be added. In the third area, new growth will be allowed to grow back. Agent McManus stated that Natural Heritage and DEP have indicated that
there were no adverse affects. Agent McManus feels that the proposal meets the performance standards and offers significant enhancement. Agent McManus questioned the vista pruning request to which Mr. Vaccaro stated that the original owner had vista pruning in perpetuity and that the corridor is sufficient. Agent McManus further stated that the pool was part of an amended order and the addition would be going over a hardscaped area. Regarding the walkway, Mr. Talbott distributed an image to show the type of walkway to be used which will have a framework with decking. The structure will be in an area that is prone to flooding. Mr. Talbott will be sending the information to DEP to clarify any questions they may have about the structure. Mr. Talbott further stated that the pathway had drifted over the 4 foot width maximum and will allow it to re-mitigate and maintain a 4 foot maximum. Agent McManus likes the plan and recommends a close
and issue.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to Close and Issue.
7:12 Ripley Crowell, AOC – 54 Bayview Road (Vista pruning with maintenance in perpetuity)
Mr. Crowell was present to address the Commission. The width of the property from line to line is 87 feet. The corridor is determined by 25% of the width of the property or 50 feet, whichever number is less. The view corridor has been established as 27.1 ft. Agent McManus stated that the request is straight forward and he recommends an approval.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to Approve the Amended Order as stated.
7:15 Peter Aledda, RDA – 116 Old Brickyard Rd. (6x20 addition to front of home)
Mr. Aledda described the project as a small addition to the front of his home and will be presenting the project next month to the ZBA. Mr. Aledda is seeking a 6 foot extension to allow room for a stairwell that will access a proposed second floor to the home. The resource area is located 50-60 feet away, the home is situated across from the pond. The Board of Health has supported the project. Three shrubs will be relocated by 6 feet and a few limbs from a scrub pine and maple at the rear of the house will need to be trimmed. Agent McManus indicated that any branches needing to be trimmed could be addressed during an on site visit. Agent McManus stated that the proposed area is landscaped and the project will have no impact on the resource area and he recommends a negative determination.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried for a Negative Determination.
7:18 Alfred Clemens, NOI – 74 Waterway (Alterations and repair to floating dock, rehab of landscaping)
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried for a Continuance until 4/30/09 at 7:12 pm at the request of the applicant.
7:21 Fran Reavey, NOI – 42 Cayuga Avenue (After-the-fact seasonal dock)
During the last meeting, it was requested that the applicant’s continuance be moved from June because Natural Heritage had resolved their issues with Mr. Reavey. John Slavinsky of Cape and Islands Engineering represented the applicant. Natural Heritage has determined that the dock can be maintained as is. A conservation management plan has been agreed to between Natural Heritage and the applicant and will be implemented in Mashpee’s Order of Conditions. Agent McManus recommends to close and issue.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to Close and Issue.
7:24 Ronald J. Bourque, RDA – 97 Monomoscoy Road West (Installation of osprey pole/platform)
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried for a Continuance until 5/28/09 at 7:06 pm at the request of the applicant.
7:27 Gap Trust, RDA – 12 Quinapen Road (Hazardous tree and English ivy removal and mitigation)
John Slavinsky of Cape and Islands Engineering represented the applicant. The pitch pine is in danger of falling and a maple tree is holding up a cherry tree. The trees are covered with ivy. The original Notice of Intent involved a re-build. English ivy has taken over the trees located between the buffer zone and the house. During the on site visit it was discovered that the pitch pine required immediate removal because it poses a significant hazard. Efforts will be made to contain the ivy. Agent McManus questioned the number of tupelo tress to be planted, which will be determined based on the circumference of the trees being removed. Agent McManus recommends a negative determination.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried for a Negative Determination.
7:30 Nancy & Richard Cook, AOC –401 Monomscoy Road (Revise dock configuration)
John Slavinsky of Cape and Islands Engineering represented the applicant. The applicant is a new owner to the property and has met with the abutters regarding their dock. The float has been turned 90 degrees perpendicular to the shore, lowered, with no planking and dropped down with an access stairway. The Harbormaster has requested that the 2 piles at the end of the float extend no further than the previous location.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to Approve the Amended Order.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to adjourn the meeting at 8:46 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Jennifer M. Clifford
Board Secretary
| 
