Conservation Commission
Minutes of June 14, 2012
Public Hearings
Mashpee Town Hall - Conference Room 1
Commissioners: Chairman John Fitzsimmons, Vice Chairman Ralph Shaw, Brad Sweet, Patty Jalowy, Lloyd Allen, Mark Gurnee and John Rogers
Staff Present: Drew McManus (Conservation Agent) and Kris Carpenter (Administrative Secretary)
Call Meeting To Order: 6:55 pm
The meeting was called to order with a quorum by Chairman Fitzsimmons at 6:55 pm.
There was no public comment.
Pre/Post Hearing Agenda:
- Minutes: Approval of the following minutes: N/A
- Ernie Vergilio- South Cape Beach Civic Association Drainage Project - Determination of filing request –
Agent McManus explains that Mr. Vergillio will present a project for the Commission to determine the type of filing for a road drainage issue.
Ernie Vergilio from 127 Whippoorwill Circle is representing the South Cape Beach Association and explains that they are having a problem with flooding of the road. He explains that at times there has been approximately 2 feet of flood water for a distance of 50-60’. There have been cars that have died on site attempting to drive through and he states that they have had some dangerous conditions. Mr. Vergilio walked the area with a representative from Waquoit Bay who explained to him that at one time, there were approximately four areas for runoffs. Mr. Vergilio states that there is a lot of overgrowth in the runoff areas and also the road has sagged a little. They would like to do two things which they have received approval from Waquoit Bay; they would like to open up the drain offs by excavating
the area but not very deep. They would use a sand base with a filter fabric and quarry rock to create a runoff with some siltation and the association would maintain these areas. Mr. Vergilio states that that solution does not really solve the problem though; they would really like to install two 4’ catch basins and lead it to a percolation pit. Mr. Vergilio says that if they could do both options than it would definitely work. Agent McManus states that this resource area is Land Subject to Coastal Storm Flow and would like the Board to decide what type of filing will be required along with what type of plan. Chairman Fitzsimmons states an RDA with engineered plans will be accepted.
HEARINGS
7:00 Stratford Pond Condominiums (83 Stratford Ponds Rd) Remove (2) trees and prune (5) trees - RDA **Continued from May 24, 2012**
Resource Area: Buffer Zone to Inland Bank
Material submitted: Force Main Plan 4/27/12 Jeff Wilson
[9:35] Jeffrey Wilson, Trustee for Stratford Ponds Association, explains that the trees that are located near the association pool are now leaning over the pool. They are requesting permission to prune five trees and remove two. Agent McManus states that the trees are in a state of decline or already dead.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried for a Negative Determination
7:03 Nathan Brunell (57 Duckblind Road) Remove two dead trees on property - RDA
Resource Area: Buffer Zone to Pond Front (Bordering Land Subject to Flooding)
Material submitted: Brunell Residence 5/23/12 Owner
[11:21] Mr. Brunell explains that he has two dead trees damaged by beetles that he would like to remove them. Agent McManus confirms that the trees are dead and present a hazard.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried for a Negative Determination
7:06 Town of Mashpee **043-2698** (Great Neck Road North) Construct 2.2 miles of new sidewalk on the north/west side of road and upgrade stormwater facilities at six locations – NOI **Cont’d to June 28th @ 7:00pm**
Resource Area:
Material submitted:
[12:52] Continued per request of the Applicant.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to continue to June 28, 2012 at 7:00pm
7:09 Richard Cook **043-2692** (Popponesset Bay) Create and operate an aquaculture project with maintenance in perpetuity - NOI **Continued from May 24, 2012**
Resource Area: Land Under Ocean, Tidal Flats, V-zone
Material submitted: Plan Showing Area of Shellfish Grant 2/28/12 Coastal Engineering Co.
[13:41] Don Monroe from Coastal Engineering is presenting for Mr. Cook and states that the Division of Marine Fisheries has rendered an opinion and are in favor of the project. Natural Heritage has commented that it will not affect any endangered species. Responses were submitted to LEC’s letter regarding the anchoring system for the shellfish bags. Mr. Monroe continues to say that Mr. Cook submitted a revised narrative that includes the description of operations for the grant area and he says that at this time, they
really only need to address two resource areas; one being land under the ocean and land containing shellfish. Mr. Monroe feels that through the narrative they provided, they have met those performance standards.
Agent McManus confirms that the performance standards for land under ocean have been met. Division of Marine Fisheries has deemed that the area does not have the requisite number of shellfish to consider it as land containing shellfish. The agent also states that it meets the performance standards for coastal beach, barrier beach and tidal flats. Mr. Gurnee asks about the depths of the anchored bags and his understanding was that the bags will be below water at all times. He feels that the bags should not show above water at any time. Mr. Monroe states that there is at least 1.1’ – 1.3’ at the lowest tide and the other corners of the grant area have 2’ – 2.7’ where there will be at least
6” of cover during low tide as the bags will not be doubled in those areas. In deeper areas where the bags will be doubled, there will be at least 1’ of water cover. Agent McManus states that they can address that concern in the Order of Conditions but would like to say that it is in the applicant’s best interest to keep the bags under water at all times as any other condition would be detrimental to the operation. Mr. Gurnee asks what the procedure is for the bags in the winter and Mr. Monroe states that they have designed the system so that it withstands any force of up to 2000 lbs per square foot. He states that there have been issues brought up regarding ice flow and Mr. Cook has indicated that the bags in smaller areas (under the 2’ contour) will be moved to deeper waters and will alleviate any concerns about ice flow. Mr. Gurnee asks if this could be written into the Order of Conditions also. Mr. Cook agrees that the
shallow area could be problematic in the winter so he would move the bags to the deepest section to protect the oysters through the winter.
Chairman Fitzsimmons opens questions to the audience but states that it is the Commission’s intention to move this application up or down tonight. The Chairman states that if the decision is to approve the application then the technical features only will be incorporated into the Order of Conditions.
Agent McManus would like to respond to one item that was brought to attention in a letter to the Commission; Mr. Wall cited a regulation under Mashpee’s Chapter 172 – Structures & Plan requirements, Regulation 3 – Part A-6. Mr. Wall states that Mr. Cook does not show the layout, spacing and sizing of the proposed aquaculture gear on the plans submitted with the Notice of Intent. Agent McManus states that Regulation 3 – Part A-6 Section D says that the Concom reserves the right to require other features and information shown on the plan or included as a separate narrative. Mr. Cook has included those details in his narrative.
Chairman Fitzsimmons states that they have received a letter from Mr. Zammito who is concerned about ice flow in the winter which was already discussed. The Chairman says that they have taken it under advisement and will review it in the Order of Conditions.
Attorney Brian Wall discussed one item regarding the compliance to the regulations. Mr. Wall states that the first location proposal was not in rare endangered species habitat but this location is. Mr. Wall had suggested in their first materials submitted that there be a wildlife habitat evaluation performed but it did not gain any attraction from the Commission. Chairman Fitzsimmons states that it was not necessary since there have been letters submitted from the Division of Fisheries and Wildlife and the Audubon Society. Mr. Wall states that Mashpee’s by law requires an evaluation; Regulation 20 states that if an application proposes alterations of 300sf or more of flat or land under the ocean than a wildlife habitat evaluation is required. Agent McManus says that it depends on the interpretation of
300sf of alterations as the only alterations will be the areas where the anchoring devices will be attached to land and that total area combined does not exceed 300sf. Mr. Wall also cites Regulation 23 where Mashpee’s bylaw has made significant protections for rare species habitat and presents a presumption that any person disturbing soil in rare species habitat presumptively does not meet the performance standards. Mr. Wall states that that the applicant is required to submit compelling evidence to overcome that presumption.
Chairman Fitzsimmons asks if there are any other comments from the public.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to Close and Issue
7:12 Katharine & Brown Lingamfelter **043-2697** (65 Seconsett Point Road) Construct a detached boathouse with two bedrooms above, a small addition & porch on existing dwelling. Also proposed is a Title 5 septic system to replace two cesspools - NOI
Resource Area: Buffer Zone to Coastal Bank/LSCSF/Land Under Ocean
Material submitted: Proposed Site Plan 6/8/12 Cape & Islands Engineering / Mitigation Planting & Landscape Plan 4/3/12 Barnstable Land Design
[31:15] Jack Vaccaro from Vaccaro Environmental is presenting for the home owner and explains that the existing structures on the property consist of the dwelling, detached garage and a detached shed. They have submitted a proposal for three areas of home improvement; the first one is a boathouse designed to house three boats with two bedrooms above; the second is to maintain the existing cottage with a proposed porch and an addition. The last element is a Title 5 septic upgrade which will replace two existing cesspools with a mounded
system that will have an innovative alternative treatment. Mr. Vaccaro states that this is a very advanced system which will provide extraordinary reduction of nitrogen and phosphorous. Mr. Vaccaro explains that the challenge of this project is the fact that it is very close to Waquoit Bay and a salt marsh on the other side. It is not possible to construct the additions and boathouse to be more than 50’ from the wetlands; either the coastal bank or the salt marsh. Mr. Vaccaro felt that it would better to provide the 50’ setback from the salt marsh as opposed to the coastal bank. They are therefore proposing a structure that is approximately 30’ back from the vinyl bulkhead. Mr. Vaccaro is asking for a waiver from Regulation 29 and has calculated out the mitigation requirement for a total of about 4700sf but they will provide over 6300sf of mitigation.
Agent McManus states that there is a difference between mitigation and landscape. The plan presented is more of a landscape format and it does state in the regulation for a naturally vegetated buffer strip that when mitigation is put in place, it should be to recapitulate the contiguous nature of the buffer strip. The agent states that looking at the landscape plan and the crisscross sandy pathways; he feels that it is not in line with proper mitigation. He recommends the plan to be re-drawn to show an enhancement to the buffer and eliminating the pathways, except the one to the boathouse. Mr. Gurnee asks where the mitigation area is versus the existing landscaped shrubbery and trees. Mr. Vaccaro states that there is a
brush line and also pockets in the vegetated areas that will be enhanced.
Mr. Allen asks about the 12’ water which is inevitable in this area and what precautions have been taken with the proposed boathouse. Mr. John Slavinski with Cape & Islands Engineering explains that the boathouse is a slab on grade and will be supported by a system of piers below ground such as the existing garage. Mr. Allen asks about the breakaway sections and Mr. Slavinski states that there will be multiple breakaway sections because they are in the velocity zone.
Chairman Fitzsimmons states that he finds it difficult to support the application as there are no compelling reasons for waivers for the additions. The addition is 11’ from the coastal bank and on the other side is a large proposed porch that is 10’ from the coastal bank. The large boathouse is within 30’ of the resource area. The by law was written specifically for compelling reasons and the Chairman states that he does not see it. He recommends possibly putting the boathouse on the other side and to place the Title 5 system further down. Mr. Slavinski states that there is no place else the Title 5 can go. He states that there are two cesspools sitting in about a foot and half of water and they will be putting in a HOOT system which will reduce the nitrogen and
phosphorous along with a UV light. They will also move the osprey nest because it is sitting too close to the electric lines; one was even electrocuted recently. Mr. Slavinski says that they will be willing to remove the proposed addition and possibly reduce the size of the porch. Mr. Sweet asks if the boathouse can be moved closer to the road. Mr. Slavinski states that the owners will not want to revise the boathouse location.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to Deny the Notice of Intent
7:15 James Ryder (99 Bayshore Drive) Replace existing septic tank and install a new Title 5 sewage disposal system. Existing leaching pit will be pumped dry, disconnected and filled with clean sand or removed - RDA
Resource Area: Buffer Zone to Coastal Bank/ BVW/ LSCSF
Material submitted: Sewage Disposal System Repair 5/11/12 Christopher Costa & Associates
[53:21] Matt Costa from Christopher Costa & Associates is presenting for the homeowners and explains that the dwelling has been operating on a failed septic system and would like to install a new Title 5 leach field and tank.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried for a Negative Determination
7:18 Mary Zocchi (9 Ockway Bay Road) Construct a single family dwelling with attached garage, porch, patios, in-ground pool with fence enclosure, vista corridor and also to construct and maintain a landing, stairs, pier, ramp & float system - NOI
Resource Area: Land Under Ocean, LSCSF, Salt Marsh, Coastal Bank, Buffer to Coastal Bank
Material submitted: Site Design Plan 5/17/17 Christopher Costa & Associates
[56:30] Matt Costa from Christopher Costa & Associates is presenting for the homeowners and they are proposing a single family dwelling which a portion of the dwelling straddles the 100’ buffer from the coastal bank. Also proposed is a pool, patio and associated landscaping for the structure which falls within the 50’-100’ buffer. Mr. Costa states that they have kept all structures 50’ from the top of the coastal bank but in order to construct the pool and patio, they needed to install a limit of work line that does creep inside the 50’ buffer which they plan to restore that area with mitigation plantings. Mr. Costa is also proposing approximately 830sf of mitigation
plantings between the 50’-100’ buffer and a pathway that will lead to a pier through the existing trees. They would like to construct an elevated walkway that will begin at the edge of the coastal bank and elevate over the entire coastal bank down to the beginning of the pier. The pier is mesh decking over the area of salt marsh which will allow 70% of light penetration and extend the decking with traditional spaced planks. The piles will be vinyl coated with 3’ x 25’ aluminum ramp and a 6’ x 20’ polyethylene shell float which will have float stops installed. Mr. Costa continues to explain that the lawn area proposed will be installed in accordance with Mashpee’s lawn regulations and the proposed vista corridor is also per regulations.
Agent McManus states that because all structures are being maintained outside the 50’ buffer, there is no requirement for mitigation or a request for a waiver. The coastal bank is a vegetated non-eroding coastal bank. The Harbormaster and Shellfish Constable reviewed the plans which the Harbormaster stated his typical requirement of displaying the home address on all sections of the pier, ramp and float along with the DEP number.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to Close and Issue
- New Signage: Noisy Hole/ Besse Bog Conservation Areas – Agent McManus says that the signage for these areas has been installed. They were made by Davis Signs and they came out great. The signs will last much longer and will be more resistance to weather and vandalism.
- Mashpee River Woodlands Trail Work Day: 6/22/12 @ 9:00 a.m. – The Land Stewards program is hosting an extensive trail work day at the Mashpee River Woodlands. AmeriCorps is providing seven volunteers including Kelsey Boyd; a few land stewards including Bill McKay who has been a long time land steward and does a fantastic job of monitoring the trails. Mr. McKay has secured a wood router to create post signs that will display the initials of the trail. DPW is providing a Brush Hog to take care of the trails on the western side which are very overgrown. Eric Grotske will also be volunteering. Most of the work will be done with hand tools and trail markers will be hung on trees. The markers are color coded and will help identify the trails. Pizza will be provided for lunch.
- Tidewatch /New Seabury: Coastal Bank Erosion Project – Agent McManus states that Tidewatch and New Seabury will come before us on June 28th. They are currently still working out some details as far as the coastal bank stabilization project; cutting away filter fabric and boards. There are still some minor details to be worked out. Tidewatch is still responsible for a significant amount of beach nourishment that has not been met over the last several years. The Agent states that this nourishment also needs to be hashed out with Tidewatch; maybe they will combine the nourishment efforts onto one property but for now, but he feels that Tidewatch should at least deposit some sand on the wall as a compromise for the lack of nourishment over the last several years. Tidewatch was
supposed to nourish 1500cu yds a year for the purpose of maintaining the wall and down drift nourishment.
Chairman Fitzsimmons is concerned about what it is they will be trying to achieve on the 28th or what is the Commission supposed to tell them. Agent McManus states that the first and foremost is to get rid of the filter fabric and impediments to the sand migration on Bayswater property. The Chairman says that because it was not in the original design or Order of Conditions than can they just take it out. Agent McManus states that they need to see how the project pans out as it was originally intended to. They do have some ideas about maintaining the spacing between the piles as the sand is going to compress them closer together over time. Both engineering consultants are working together to find a solution to enhance that project’s capability of allowing sand down to the beach
without it being impeded to the greatest extent possible. The final phase is the removal of the rocks from where the access of Tidewatch is. According to the letter from Town Counsel, all of these can be allowed under the existing Order of Conditions even though it has been issued a Certificate of Compliance; it still can be approved as additional work and then the COC can be amended to reflect that. The last thing is the beach nourishment which will be mostly up to them with little consequence to the Commission; depending on how much value they put on the coastal beach. New Seabury is under no obligation for nourishment of any kind because they have no structure on the lots. They have been doing it entirely to preserve their coastal bank and to preserve the real estate integrity of the lot. Tidewatch was specifically obligated under an Order of Conditions to put down 1500 cubic yards of sand a year. The agent feels that Tidewatch should
begin the nourishment activities immediately at least to show a good faith effort that they are adhering to their Order of Conditions. Vice Chairman Shaw asks of the material that they owe and the agent states that he has yet to figure out how that will work. The Chairman asks if they are supposed to tell both parties what to do but the agent says that he would like to give them an opportunity to work on a solution. The Vice Chairman asks about a violation notice because Tidewatch is currently in violation and Agent McManus says that he will be following up on it although according to their legal counsel, they are intending to come into compliance. It’s just a matter of time which the agent has already stated to them that it needs to be as soon as possible. The agent does state that it is a completely separate issue from the Bayswater issue. It is a violation of their current Order of Conditions and Tidewatch needs to address it. Mr.
Sweet states that the area could have been worse with a lot of damage to the armored wall by now if Bayswater had not been dumping hundreds of cubic yards of sand over the side and also at the second tee which has been working its way down and most likely helped to keep the toe of their armored wall in place.
Chairman Fitzsimmons asks if June 28th is an informational session only so basically no questions from the audience. Agent McManus confirms that it is information only and that they will know exactly what they are supposed to present at that point of time. It is not a debate and it is only to update the Commission of what the two parties have worked out. The Chairman recommends a two-page hand out that they can provide to the Board to describe what the situation is. Mr. Sweet asks if Town Counsel will be able to review their response to see if they have met their requirements and the agent confirms that Attorney Costello will review everything.
Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to adjourn the meeting at 8:28 pm. [1:32:20]
Respectfully submitted,
Kris Carpenter
Administrative Secretary
***All material submitted for hearings can be found on Conservation Flash Drive dated 7/1/10***
| 
