Conservation Commission
Minutes of February 24, 2011
Public Hearings
Mashpee Town Hall - Conference Room 3
Commissioners: Brad Sweet, Mark Gurnee, Lloyd Allen, John Rogers
Staff Present: Drew McManus (Conservation Agent) and Kris Carpenter (Administrative Secretary)
Call Meeting To Order: 6:55 pm - Public Comment
Pre/Post Hearing Agenda:
- Minutes: Approval of the following minutes: Thursday, January 27, 2011 & Thursday, February 10, 2011
Agent McManus states that the February 10th meeting can not be approved as Vice Chairman Shaw is not present and that would not leave a quorum.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve the minutes of January 27, 2011 and hold the minutes of February 10, 2011 until March 10, 2011.
- Request for Two Week Extension of Vista Pruning Window: The Agent would like to request a two week extension to the vista pruning window to March 14th instead of the March 1st deadline.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve the two week extension for Vista Pruning until March 14, 2011.
- Preparation for MACC Presentation with Alex Hackman: Saturday, March 5th, is the MACC Conference in Worcester and the Agent mentions that the Commissioners are all members and are welcome to attend. Agent McManus will be doing a presentation with Alex Hackman who oversaw the Eel River restoration. Mr. Hackman will show what was done at the Eel River which is mostly complete. Agent McManus will then present for the second half and will explain what Mashpee is currently preparing for Quashnet River Realignment Project.
- Quashnet Site Visit with David Gould: The Agent had met with David Gould last week who is the Natural Resources Coordinator with the Town of Plymouth. Mr. Gould mostly prepared and started the Eel River project in Plymouth. They went out to the Quashnet Bogs and Mr. Gould had some interesting things to say in regards to the approach that Haley & Aldrich outlined in their feasibility study. Plymouth’s approach is a “Process Based Approach” and that Haley & Aldrich basically outline berming up the sides of the new channel so that when the water rises it will not run over the top of the banks. Mr. Gould states that they prefer an involvement of a flood plain with the river so that when it over flows the banks there is input into other channels such as small streams which are
associated with a wetland systems rather than a channelized system totally isolated from any wetlands. Agent McManus would like to reassess the approach of the Haley & Aldrich outline whose specialty is Pollution Remediation. The agent suggests bringing in other consultants who have stronger experience with ecological restoration. Mr. Sweet asks if Mr. Hackman would be available to the Town and the Agent responds that he is. The town of Plymouth obtained a company called Interfluve which specializes in river realignment and restoration projects. Mr. Gould had suggested sending a Request for Response to consultant firms who would come in to give a brief presentation of their approaches.
HEARINGS
7:00 Stephen Miller SE 43-2648 (22 Squaw’s Lane) Addition within existing building footprint - NOI
Resource Area: LSCSF, Coastal Dune & Buffer to Coastal Beach
Material submitted: Proposed House Addition Over Existing Deck 1/24/11 Cape & Islands Engineering
Jack Vaccaro from Vaccaro Environmental is presenting for the owner. The property borders Nantucket Sound, the beach and a dune that extends up onto the southern part of the property. The house is elevated on piles and creates favorable conditions for dune migration. The applicant would like to build an addition on the back side of the house on an area that is currently occupied by a deck. They will not be increasing the building footprint and just simply putting an enclosed structure on the same footprint. It will be supported on two concrete piles that will be installed along the seaward face of the structure. They will cut and reduce the size of the deck and join it to the new addition. Agent McManus states
that there is no encroachment and confirms that the piles are flush with the edge of the deck. The project is pretty straightforward and meets performance standards for coastal dune. Mr. Sweet asks if the Building Department has reviewed the plans as of yet because he is concerned if only two additional pilings will hold the new structure. If Building requires more support than the homeowner will have to come back to Conservation for another review. Mr. Gurnee asks about the type of equipment to be used and Mr. Vaccaro replies that the concrete pump will be the largest piece of equipment. Agent McManus mentions that the one of the template conditions states that areas that are disturbed are to be replaced with natural ground cover equivalent to what is exists in the area. The Agent also mentions that the Board of Health would like some clarification on the architect of the room and door sizes.
Mr. Sterling who is an abutter would like to make aware that there is a septic system under the driveway on Kim Path and recommends using the driveway on Squaw’s lane.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to Close and Issue
7:03 Mark Sullivan (318 Red Brook Road) Remove 10 pine trees & construct 8’ wide deck to access door - RDA Cont’d from February 10, 2011
Resource Area: Buffer to Coastal Bank, Buffer to Wetland
Material submitted: Proposed Sewage Disposal System 10/12/05 Cape & Islands Engineering (Owner hand drew deck on plan 11/12/10)
Mark Sullivan states that he would like to remove ten pine trees that are within 2’ of the house. Most of the trees that he is concerned with are dead. The trees are approximately 20-30’ high. The second part of the project is a proposed deck connecting the side door (facing wetland) to the street side of the home.
Mr. Allen recommends dealing with this project in two sections; one for the trees and two for the deck. Agent McManus mentions that he and Mr. Sweet did a site visit and there was evidence that most of the trees had bark beetle damage which is a common occurrence on Cape Cod with Pitch Pines. The trees are a close proximity to the house which compromises the safety of the house and he would recommend removal.
Agent McManus states that there are two things with the deck and when he looked back to previous filing, it was very tightly scrutinized in which Natural Heritage & Endangered Species Program sent a letter that states the house construction does not adversely effect any priority habitat species but it is very close. If there were any more encroachment than it will be in Natural Habitat jurisdiction and will require a MESA filing. The other thing that he noticed from the previous filing was that the landscape plan has approved mitigation specifically where Mr. Sullivan is proposing to place the deck. The Building Department had sent the Agent a note stating that building regulations only require two forms of egress so there is not
a compelling need for the third door. Agent McManus reads the Chapter 172 bylaw for the record. The Waiver of Requirement is set up for the purpose of a compelling need for health or safety reasons or if improving a resource area. He is concerned with the wildlife impact and trying to maintain the buffer strip as originally permitted. Mr. Sullivan has considered the wetland area and limited work area and states that they are placing 10-12 sonotubes but portions will be hovering over the limited work area and the actual entrance to the deck will be within the work area. The Agent states that the issue is the work area that is a naturally vegetated buffer and is in pristine condition and that it is not a previously disturbed with lawn or landscaped area. Mr. Gurnee asks if Mr. Sullivan decreases the size of the deck – possibly to 3’ – and possibly a raised walkway directly from the door, if that would not encroach the buffer.
Agent McManus suggests looking at that type of deck and placing the mitigation in a new area. Mr. Sullivan had decided on 8’ in terms of a handicap access but can change it to 3’ with a cantilever. Agent McManus recommends instead of a continuance that this RDA can be approved contingent upon receiving new plans that show the width and length of the revised deck.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried for a Negative Determination contingent upon receipt of revised plan
- Conscom Permit Fee Increases: (March 14th Selectmen’s meeting) – Agent McManus explains that he was unable to attend the last Selectmen’s meeting for the permit fee increases. It has been postponed until the March 14th meeting.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to adjourn the meeting at 7:30 pm.
Respectfully submitted,
Kris Carpenter
Administrative Secretary
***All material submitted for hearings can be found on Conservation Flash Drive dated 7/1/10***
| 
