Conservation Commission
Minutes of July 10, 2014
Public Hearings
Mashpee Town Hall
Ockway Meeting Room
Commissioners: John Fitzsimmons, Bud Shaw, Brad Sweet, John Rogers, Dale McKay and Louis Dimeo (Associate Member).
Staff Present: Drew McManus (Conservation Agent) and Judy Daigneault (Recording Secretary.
CALL MEETING TO ORDER: 6:55 p.m.
The meeting was called to order with a quorum by Chairman John Fitzsimmons at 5:55 p.m.
There was no public comment.
PRE/POST HEARING AGENDA:
Approval of Minutes: June 12, 2014 and June 26, 2014
Motion: Mr. Shaw moved to approve the minutes of June 12, 2014 and June 26, 2014, seconded by Mr. Sweet. Vote unanimous. 5-0
76 Triton Way: Request for beach nourishment abatement SE 43-1214
It was agreed by all parties to table until the end of this meeting to allow more time for discussion.
Discussion: Non-biodegradable components (filter fabric and wire meshing) to soft solutions. (South Cape Beach/New Seabury Golf Course projects).
The Agent informed the Commission he had recent correspondence with DEP regarding some of the elements of the soft solutions, such as filter fabric and wire mesh netting, which are not biodegradable. DEP recently approved South Cape Beach project and it was discovered by a DEP Agent the project is being wrapped in this filter fabric which was not included in the plan and therefore was not approved by the Commission. DEP alerted the Agent what was happening at the project so the Agent had a meeting with Town Manager Joyce Mason and DPW Director Catherine Laurent. DEP would like to see the envelopes dug out and the filter fabric removed. The Agent’s suggested, as a compromise to not have the Town go back in and dig up the project, but to monitor what has been installed and not to use the filter fabric for the
remainder of the project. The Agent felt DEP was not going to go along with this suggestion. He said the Commission needs to decide what to do about this project and also be mindful of these non-biodegradable elements in future applications such as the Seaside applications and the approved application at the New Seabury Golf Course where they will use the filter fabric and the wire mesh netting. The Agent’s suggestion to monitor the portion of the completed project at South Cape Beach is to make sure if the filter fabric gets damaged it doesn’t become marine borne debris because it is not biodegradable. He said he hoped that adding a condition to the existing permit that the filter fabric shall not be used for the remainder of the project will be acceptable to the DEP. The Agent said DEP wants the project dug up and the filter fabric taken out but, ultimately it is the Commission’s decision. The Agent stated the filter fabric is a
violation because it was not shown on the plan and the Commission was not aware of it. The contractor installed it without the Commission’s approval. Removing it will cause the contractor a significant expense. The Agent said he contacted other towns, particularly Chatham, and they outright ban the use of filter fabric and wire meshing when it comes to soft solutions because of the fact that it doesn’t biodegrade and becomes storm water debris. The Commissioners discussed this issue at length and decided they would table the discussion until August 14.
HEARINGS:
6:00 Aldo R and Sandra Esposito, 25 Sand Dollar Lane. Proposed patio area. Continued from 5/8/14. Homeowner requests another continuance to August 28, 2014 at 6:03. RDA
Motion: Mr. Shaw moved to continue the hearing at the request of the homeowner to August 28, 2014 at 6:03, seconded by Mr. Sweet. Vote unanimous. 5-0
6:03 Santuit Serendipity LLC, 27 Santuit Lane. Proposed tree removal and tree pruning. RDA
Resource Area: Buffer Zone to Land Under Water Santuit Pond.
Mr. Richard Charlton presented the project. He said there are trees that need to be removed as well as tree pruning and maintenance to several other trees. He noted the trees on a plan he presented to the Commissioners. The Agent stated he went out to the property and examined the trees that were flagged. An arborist examined the trees that need to be removed. The Agent noted the trees on photos and said there is no adverse impact. Proposal is within the buffer zone to land under water body associated with Santuit Pond. The Agent recommended a negative determination.
No comment from the public.
Motion: Mr. Shaw moved a negative determination, seconded by Mr. Sweet. Vote unanimous. 5-0
6:06 Cotuit Solar, LLC, 36 Savannas Path. Proposed renovation of existing structure into commercial space and construction of a warehouse along with utilities, storm-water management, driveways and parking areas. Continued from June 26, 2014 to allow time for field staking on the property. Engineer requests additional continuance to August 28, 2014 at 6:06 to allow for ZBA approval. NOI
Motion: Mr. Shaw moved to continue the hearing at the request of the engineer until August 28, 2014 at 6:06 p.m., seconded by Mr. Sweet. Vote unanimous. 5-0
The Agent explained to the public present that it is a procedural issue and the hearing is continued to August 28. He said the Bylaw requires an applicant to apply to other boards that have jurisdiction over their project before appearing before the Conservation Commission. Cotuit Solar has not applied to the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Agent said the request for a continuance came in this afternoon. There were several questions from the public who were concerned about the continuance of the hearing. The Agent said a hearing can be continued up to the day of or at the meeting. The Agent said in the future, if time permits, continuances will be posted on the web site.
6:09 Mark V. and Donna Jean Lopez, 103 Meetinghouse Road. Proposed Title 5 Septic System upgrade. RDA
Resource Area: Outer Riparian Zone, Mashpee River.
Brian Maxwell, Braken Engineering, was representing the applicant and explained the project was to replace an existing failed septic system with a new upgraded Title 5 system. The Agent said the resource area is associated with the Mashpee River. Most of the work will take place in the outer riparian zone. It is a failed septic system and the upgrade is required by the Board of Health. The application is under review by the Board of Health.
No comment from the public.
Motion: Mr. Shaw moved a negative determination, seconded by Mr. Sweet. Vote unanimous. 5-0
6:12 Kenneth and Gloria J. Liatsos, 118 Shore Drive West. Proposed coastal bank stabilization (soft solution) and coastal beach mitigation replenishment. Attorney Mark Gildea requests a continuance to August 14, 2014 at 6:03 to allow for DEP Review. NOI
Motion: Shaw moved to continue the hearing at the request of the Attorney, seconded by Mr. Sweet. Vote unanimous 5-0
6:15 David and Glenys Pinchin, 124 Shore Drive West, Proposed coastal bank stabilization (soft solution) and coastal beach mitigation replenishment. Attorney Mark Gildea requests a continuance to August 14, 2014 at 6:06 to allow for DEP review. NOI
Motion: Mr. Sweet moved to continue the hearing at the request of the attorney to
August 14, 2014 at 6:06, seconded by Mr. Shaw. Vote unanimous. 5-0
6:18 Michael J. and Dawn M. Southwick, 126 Shore Drive West. Proposed coastal bank stabilization (soft solution) and coastal beach mitigation replenishment. Attorney Mark Gildea requests a continuance to August 14, 2014 at 6:09 to allow for DEP review. NOI
Motion: Mr. Shaw moved to continue the hearing at the request of the attorney to August 14, 2014, seconded by Mr. Sweet. Vote unanimous 5-0
76 Triton Way Request for beach nourishment abatement SE 43-1214
Mr. Ken Mackin and Mr. Tony Caruso were present. Mr. Mackin said their request is to get an abatement for future beach nourishment requirements. The basis for their requests is the initial Order of Conditions in 1993, SE 43-1214, stipulated there had to be beach nourishment on the beach. The beach is no longer there. The two owners abutting this property no longer have to do beach nourishment. Mr. Mackin said they would like to request a waiver for any future obligations. He said since they are surrounded by houses on both sides that have been granted relief, they should also be granted the same relief. The Agent said he had discussions regarding the purpose of beach nourishment when it comes to riveting and coastal bank. It involves placing sand into the system that has been denied because
of armoring of the coastal bank. It is about sediment into the overall system.The Agent explained the process is to apply for an Amendment to a Certificate of Compliance in order to be relieved of the obligation. He noted that the other properties did not have access across their property to get the sand down to the beach because, at the time, the New Seabury ownership would not allow them to use New Seabury’s access. In addition, marine fisheries had concerns about the deposition of the sand in the system because some of the land under ocean are rocky cobble. When rocky cobble is smothered with sand, it alters the habitat. Marine Fisheries had expressed their concerns over that nourishment activity. Those considerations were presented at that time and the Commission granted relief to those homeowners. The Agent said there are other properties that are continuing to nourish, including Triton Way and New Seabury. He said the less
sand that is put into the system the more burden will exist on other properties because there is less nourishment coming from the other properties.
Mr. Caruso said they don’t mind participating if everyone is going to do it but they don’t know why some homeowners are required to do beach nourishment, while others aren’t. The Agent said DEP or Marine Fisheries have not recently commented on this and he suggested the applicants submit a request to formally Amend the Certificate of Compliance. The Agent also recommended he will try to find out what the current impacts are of this nourishment activity from DEP and get some guidance from DEP. He said he will do some research on this to get clarification. The applicants will file the appropriate paperwork for the August 28 meeting.
Administrative Review: Gooseberry Island Trust. Proposed saltmarsh restoration on southeast corner of Gooseberry Island (Map 100 Parcel 6)
Matthew Haney, Property Manager, Gooseberry Island Trust, stated there is third party damage to the saltmarsh. He showed photographs which showed the damage to the salt marsh. The Agent advised the Commission to be reassured that whoever does the work has experience and that Mr. Haney provide the credentials to the Commission on whoever is doing the work. Mr. Haney said he would provide this information to the Commission and would provide references at the request of the Commission. Mr. Haney said USDA has guidelines on how this should be done. The Agent said the Commission wants reassurance that the saltmarsh restoration will be done the right way and not end up affecting other areas of salt marsh.
Motion: Mr. Sweet moved to approve the Administrative Request to allow for the restoration request on Gooseberry Island with the condition that the applicant secure a contractor that meets the requirement of the Agent. Seconded by Mr. Shaw. Vote unanimous.
Mr. McKay asked if this restoration at Gooseberry Island should require a formal application. The Agent said it would be up to the Commission to decide. He said if the Commission feels it is the best way to ensure it is done properly, it would be at their discretion. The Commission discussed some of the concerns regarding the damage in the area. The Agent explained Mr. Haney notified the tribe through his legal counsel to put a no trespassing order on the island so they can’t use the island anymore because of the damage done. Damage was done from the operation of the aquaculture over time. Following a discussion, the Commission generally agreed to have Mr. Haney file a Notice of Intent for the restoration of the salt marsh on Gooseberry Island. The Agent stated that a Notice of Intent is the only way
the Commission can legally condition a project. The Agent recommended having Mr. Haney file a Notice of Intent for either the August 14 or August 28 meeting.
Motion: Mr. Shaw moved to have Mr. Haney file a Notice of Intent to allow for the restoration of the salt marsh at Gooseberry Island. Seconded by Mr. Sweet. Vote 4-1 with Mr. McKay voting in the negative.
The Agent asked that the Commission take a vote to discuss the Bylaw changes for the upcoming town meeting in October.
Motion: Mr. Sweet moved to discuss the Bylaw changes this evening, seconded by Mr. Shaw. Vote 5-0
The Agent reviewed the change in the Bylaw. He explained that DEP changed its abutter notification requirements for projects that are taking place for land under ocean, such as the aquaculture grant. In Massachusetts, homeowners own to mean low water so if you are an abutter to a bay or estuary you would be notified. DEP realized that could mean thousands of people so the Bylaw was changed to specify the difference between the parcel or the project locus and the setbacks of abutter notification to the project notice. Under DEP‘s new rules, abutter notification will be 100 feet from the project area, not the parcel upon which the project is located. It’s not the water body, it’s the actual project location. The other change is to linear-shaped projects that are 1000 feet or greater in length.
The change is that anyone within 1000 feet of the boundary of that linear project has to be notified. The Agent said he needs to submit any comments by Monday. The Agent said he will also have Town Counsel review the language and will send the final language to the Commissioners. He also said if the Commissioners see something in the Bylaws or regulations that need to be updated or changed to let him know. Any regulation changes would need to be advertised and then discussed at one of the Commission’s regular meetings.
Motion: Mr. Shaw moved to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Mr. Sweet. Vote unanimous 5-0 Meeting adjourned 7:32 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
Judy Daigneault, Recording Secretary
6
| 
