Mashpee Planning Board
Minutes of Meeting
September 18, 2013 at 7:00 p.m.
Waquoit Meeting Room, Mashpee Town Hall
Approved 10/16/13
Planning Board Members Present: Chairman George Petersen, Mary Waygan, Dennis Balzarini, David Kooharian, Joe Cummings
Also Present: Tom Fudala-Town Planner, Charles Rowley-Consultant Engineer
Absent: Joe Mullin
CALL TO ORDER
The Town of Mashpee Planning Board meeting was opened with a quorum in the Waquoit Meeting Room at Mashpee Town Hall by Chairman Petersen at 7:00 p.m. on Wednesday, September 18, 2013 and the Pledge of Allegiance was recited.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES—August 21, 2013
MOTION: Mr. Balzarini made a motion to accept the minutes of August 21st as written. Ms. Waygan seconded the motion. 4 yes, 1 abstain
DISCUSSION
Ms. Waygan requested that the amendments to Chapter H of the Cape Cod Commission Regulations, allowing towns to establish their own thresholds, be added to the next meeting’s agenda for discussion. Ms. Waygan learned that public comments were being sought by the Cape Cod Commission.
PUBLIC HEARING
7:10 Applicant: Federal National Mortgage Association c/o Cotuit Solar LLC
Location: 36 Savanna’s Path / Trinity Place
Request: Approval of 1-lot definitive subdivision plan and road designs
Chairman Petersen read for the record the public hearing notice. Mr. Rowley outlined, in his letter, the provisions of the Subdivision Rules and Regulations that would require compliance or a waiver if requested. Mr. Rowley indicated that he had not received a response from CSN Engineering. Joe Hackett, of Cotuit Solar, responded that he had just received the copy of the letter and had not been informed of it by his engineer. Mr. Hackett was in agreement that there were issues needing to be addressed in order for a decision to be made by the Board. Mr. Hackett indicated that a primary concern was whether or not a cul-de-sac was needed and whether the road would need to be extended through to Sampsons Mill Road. Mr. Hackett stated that they were sensitive to their impact to the neighbors.
Mr. Hackett shared the plans with the Board.
Chairman Petersen inquired whether it had been previously determined that the road would not be extended to Sampsons Mill Road and Mr. Fudala clarified that the subdivision plan was creating the layout of the road because the lot needed a defined front lot line in order to seek set-backs from the ZBA. Construction of the road would be a separate set of plans. Mr. Rowley stated that, a cul-de-sac would typically be placed at the end of the street, even if it was temporary, until the road was completed connecting it to the next intersection. Though it had been proposed to construct a paved turn-around on the adjacent lot, the plan was not presently compliant and a cul-de-sac may be required. Mr. Hackett responded that they had consulted with the Fire Department on the site plan to allow sufficient
turnaround space for their equipment. The Planning Board’s plan included an easement that would allow the public to turn around on a paved area as necessary. Mr. Hackett pointed out that the area where the cul-de-sac would be located was currently forested and wished not to develop the area. Mr. Hackett preferred to utilize an unimproved driveway at the rear of the site and expressed concern that developing a roadway could create a more heavily traveled area. Mr. Hackett stated that they wished to develop a roadway for the minimum frontage of the commercial business, and no more than necessary. Regarding the cul-de-sac, Chairman Petersen stated that the turn-around area would be different from every other cul-de-sac in Mashpee and would require drivers to make assumptions about where to go. Mr. Fudala stated that a one-lot precedent had been set using a hammerhead in place of a cul-de-sac. Mr. Kooharian suggested that there should be a simpler
option to consider for the occasional stray car. Mr. Rowley concurred that there could be options by reviewing the full site plan and emphasized that the submitted information was insufficient for the Board to make a final decision. Chairman Petersen recommended that the applicant review Mr. Rowley’s comments and update the plan. Mr. Hackett stated that he would be seeking a waiver for the cul-de-sac and recommendations from Mr. Rowley regarding alternatives. Mr. Rowley recommended that the paved surfaces located on the site plan be incorporated into the Planning Board’s plan in order for him to make recommendations. Mr. Rowley recommended that the applicant’s engineer contact him directly.
Abutter John Bartlett, of Sampsons Mill Road, stated that he was supportive of a more minimal turn-around rather than a full cul-de-sac, emphasizing that it was located in an ecologically sensitive area with an abandoned cranberry bog. Additionally, Mr. Bartlett did not support allowing the road to cut through to Route 28 as it would become a more heavily utilized road. Mr. Bartlett also pointed out that the parcel was originally residential but had been converted to commercial, despite the residential area, and expressed concern regarding future owners and future plans for the road. Mr. Fudala responded that the pavement would end in front of the house and the dirt road would remain and be gated by the applicant, which would be on record as a condition of the Special Permit.
MOTION: Mr. Balzarini made a motion to continue the public hearing to Wednesday, October 2nd for 7:30 p.m. Mr. Kooharian seconded the motion. All voted unanimously.
7:30 Applicant: BCDM, LLC
Location: On and between Blue Castle Drive and Degrass Road, identified on the Mashpee Assessors Maps as Map 104, Blocks 14, 20 and 48
Request: Approval of a Special Permit for a 16 lot cluster subdivision (Continued from 8/21)
7:30 Applicant: BCDM, LLC
Location: On and between Blue Castle Drive and Degrass Road, identified on the Mashpee Assessors Maps as Map 104, Blocks 14, 20 and 48
Request: Approve 16 lot cluster subdivision Definitive Subdivision Plan (Continued from 8/21)
Chairman Petersen read for the record the public hearing notices and opened the public hearing at 7:35 p.m., which was continued from August 21st. Matt Costa, of Costa Associates, was present to represent the applicant. Mr. Costa distributed a new definitive plan showing the realigned proposed road, named Carriage Road. Mr. Costa stated that the plan showed the entrance had been relocated by 40 feet to the northeast, the development had been reduced to 15 lots, and 35 foot radiuses to the entrance had been added. The road layout was now 40 feet wide and the previously requested waivers would be unnecessary. Additionally, Mr. Costa referenced the driveway located across from the entrance, reporting that the entrance no longer lined up with the driveway. Mr. Costa shared the
plan of the entrance and driveways.
Attorney Brian Wall was in attendance at the meeting to represent the applicant. There was question regarding Mr. Wall’s letter referencing the improvement of Blue Castle Road and Mr. Fudala confirmed that an email from Town Manager Joyce Mason indicated that Town Counsel felt that the developer could not be forced to improve the entire length of the road. There was discussion regarding the brief response from Town Counsel and Mr. Wall’s letter which had arrived by email that day. Mr. Costa stated that both attorneys were in agreement that the developer could not be required to improve the entire road but announced that the developer had offered to re-grade the existing gravel way beyond the paved area, along with a top-coat of seashells for dust control and aesthetics. Mr. Balzarini visited
the location and agreed that it would be unfair for the developer to be asked to pave the entire road without financial assistance from the residents, noting that grading and the addition of a top layer would be helpful. Mr. Costa stated that he had met with Mr. Fudala and Mr. Rowley to discuss the offer and would submit more details. Mr. Balzarini inquired whether he had been in contact with the abutter regarding the proposal and Mr. Costa responded that he spoke only with one abutter who contacted him directly. Mr. Balzarini pointed out that he recommended that the abutters be contacted for ideas and Mr. Costa stated that he was the engineer and not the developer, but was available to anyone who inquired. Ms. Waygan emphasized the need for the legal project proponent to meet with the abutters, a strong tradition encouraged by the Planning Board. Mr. Costa stated that the developers viewed the meeting on the television. Mr. Costa stated that the
public forum was where discussion could take place and that neighborhood meetings were not a requirement, though helpful.
Mr. Costa reiterated the changes made to the plan to eliminate the need for waivers, though Mr. Costa indicated that the center of pavement location may be needed while determining the location of the road in consideration of the existing water main. The pavement of the road would be lined up with the gravel as best as possible, as the existing gravel was currently outside of the layout plan. There was also concern regarding paving over existing water lines. Mr. Rowley confirmed that the Water District preferred that pavement not be placed over water lines in case repairs were necessary. Chairman Petersen expressed concern about future plans to properly align the roadway and Mr. Costa stated that their pavement would be located within the appropriate area and others would have to follow the same
standard. Mr. Cummings inquired about the homes located where Blue Castle met with Great Neck South and Mr. Costa responded that the existing gravel way was completely outside of the layout at the entrance of Great Neck Road. Mr. Costa added that, to regrade, crown and gravel, there would be no expansion to the road. Ms. Waygan inquired whether it would occur on private property and Mr. Costa confirmed that it would in some areas. Ms. Waygan stated that, to accept the offer, people owning the land would need to provide permission for the work to be completed. Mr. Balzarini pointed out that the road had been in place for 50 years, and had been the road used by the residents. Mr. Kooharian pointed out that it would be setting precedence and Ms. Waygan stated that she wanted to hear their opinion before the Special Permit Hearing was over. Chairman Petersen noted that there was also concern regarding the additional traffic on Degrass Road.
Regarding the waiver list, Mr. Rowley confirmed that the street width and curb radius waiver were no longer an issue but that items 4 and 5 continued to be an issue since the location of the pavement was still unknown. Mr. Rowley had not yet seen a revised profile plan so was not yet ready to reduce the minimum grade to 1%. Regarding Blue Castle, Mr. Rowley agreed about ensuring that all residents were in support of the re-grading because the Planning Board likely did not have the authority to authorize work outside of the road layout and recommended forwarding a public document to the residents. Mr. Costa emphasized that it was an offer they could present to the abutters and acquire feedback from the residents. To ensure that all of the residents were contacted and informed, Ms. Waygan would like
to see their address. Chairman Petersen pointed out that re-paving the road would create even greater challenges. Mr. Fudala confirmed that there was no precedent for a similar issue. Mr. Balzarini suggested that the developer was offering an improvement to the road and it would not be fair for the developer to be told to pave the road.
Mr. Wall stated that he had been recently retained by the developer, so was unable to forward the letter any sooner and believed that there would be a continuance to allow further discussion of the matter. Mr. Wall indicated that his letter presented reasons why it would be unreasonable to require that the developer improve the road within the layout as a condition of approval. However, to be a good neighbor, the developer had offered to re-grade the road, applying a permeable surface. Mr. Wall confirmed that he would be in touch with the abutters who would be impacted by road re-grading.
Mr. Fudala reported that the Board of Health approved the subdivision but would need to apply for a nitrogen aggregation agreement plan to the Board of Health and DEP.
Wayne Reed, of Blue Castle, referenced the 10 new homes driving on the road and inquired about who would be maintaining the road. Mr. Reed stated that $1200 per year was currently being spent to maintain the road for existing residents. Mr. Reed felt that the issue should have been addressed initially when the lots were first sold. Mr. Reed questioned why homes outside of Blue Castle would be considered part of the tract and expressed concern regarding the density. Ms. Waygan responded that it was a cluster division and more open space than usual was required to be set aside. Mr. Reed added that Blue Castle should be paved with the addition of the homes. Mr. Balzarini suggested contacting new neighbors to ask for contributions to street improvements and Mr. Reed stated that the
developer was asked to contribute and did not. Mr. Fudala clarified that the zoning bylaw defined a tract as a contiguous area of land that could be subdivided or not, crossed by roadways or streams and may be single or multiple ownership.
Erik Lebrano, Blue Castle Drive, pointed out that the road had just been improved in June but was already in poor condition and suggested that seashells would be of little help. Mr. Lebrano pointed out that the water lines were located in the proper layout of the road, with the expectation that the road would eventually be paved and laid out in its proper location. Mr. Lebrano pointed out that it was a private road and that the proposed acreage did not join. There was discussion about the three lots sold separately by the developer located on Blue Castle, and two that fronted on Great Neck Road. Mr. Lebrano stated that the houses drove on Blue Castle because of the location of their driveways. Mr. Lebrano also inquired about the septic systems and expressed concern about the property sitting
on Mashpee’s aquifer. Mr. Costa responded that the nitrogen aggregation plan would be submitted first to the Board of Health, and then the DEP, following approval of the subdivision plan. The plan would calculate the nitrogen load for each individual lot, 1 bedroom per 10,000 feet which was standard for sensitive areas, such as Zone 2. Credit will be taken from the open space area so that the total aggregate load would not exceed 440 gallons per acre. Mr. Wall researched many of the deeds which described the parcels as “by the way,” meaning that they owned to middle of the road allowing for passage up and down the road. Mr. Wall pointed out the challenge that the road existed without the proper approval of the Planning Board, and no association. Mr. Wall recommended the Proprietor Statute, allowing any three members to create an association with the Town Clerk in order to analyze the road needs and enter into contracts to repair the road
and assess neighbors their fair share of the costs. Mr. Costa stated that he had not yet met with the Water District but expected to hear back prior to finalizing the plan with the Planning Board. Chairman Petersen inquired whether the new owners would also own to the middle of the road and Mr. Wall responded that it would depend on the title, but by owning on both sides of the road, there were more options available, such as making the new owners members of an association. The Chair expressed his concern about the possibility of the new neighbors being precluded from usage of the road. Mr. Wall felt that residents could not be precluded from using the road. Ms. Waygan inquired whether the developer planned to form an association and Mr. Wall indicated that he would find out. Mr. Costa indicated that an association, or subdivision covenant, had been proposed for maintenance of the shoulders, drainage areas and privacy screen maintenance.
Mr. Fudala stated that the ownership plans for the open space, whether it would be Town, land trust or association with conservation restrictions, would also need to be declared. Mr. Costa stated that the information was addressed in the narrative for association ownership following approval of the nitrogen plan. Mr. Fudala also stated that a water quality report would also be required. Mr. Costa confirmed that the homes would have individual on-site septic systems.
Linda Lubelzic, of Tracy Lane, indicated that it would be easier for all 15 houses to use the paved road, rather than the gravel road, and emphasized her continued concern regarding increased traffic. Mr. Balzarini inquired whether the residents were willing to pay for the road and a resident responded that they did not feel they should. Mr. Balzarini inquired whether the residents supported the developer’s proposal to re-grade the road, and a resident inquired whether it would be completed yearly. Mr. Balzarini suggested it could be the responsibility of the residents. Ms. Waygan inquired whether the residents of Blue Castle Road would be willing to form an association and formalize an agreement with the new association in order to address road maintenance issues. Mr. Lebrano stated that
the roadway traveled on and off residents’ properties and expressed his desire that the developers be more forthcoming regarding contributions to the roadway. Chairman Petersen recommended creating an association, but noted that it could be challenging to have all residents pay their fair share. The Chair expressed concern that residents could potentially abandon use of the road when it reached a state of disrepair and recommended some sort of a binding association in order to contribute to its repair over the long term. Mr. Wall stated that the lots on Blue Castle would be part of the new association, but also possibly a Blue Castle association, and suggested that a contract be developed between the two associations. Mr. Rowley inquired how the configuration of Blue Castle would be defined through an agreement and Mr. Wall suggested that if the road had been out of layout for more than 20 years, rights may exist by prescription and would be the entire
way.
Hugh Barnes, of Blue Castle, suggested that the developer take the initiative to contact existing residents in order to resolve the issue amicably as they were the ones bringing the problem to the neighborhood. Mr. Kooharian indicated his preference that the developer addresses the issue of ongoing road maintenance prior to Planning Board approval. Mr. Fudala stated that there were 3 additional parcels not yet developed. Mr. Wall responded that the developer had proposed a solution, but that they were not legally required to do so. Mr. Wall added that conditions to the permit had to be reasonable and fair. Mr. Wall also stated that the cost to improve the road to town standards would be ½ million dollars. Mr. Kooharian stated that the developer should begin the process in order to
create the associations and draft an agreement because the new development would impact the existing road and neighborhood. Mr. Wall responded that he would reach out to residents eastward on Blue Castle and will receive a letter with his contact information. Mr. Costa stated that a condition could not be imposed on the developer to force others to do something. The Chair stated that the proposal was a nice offer and encouraged the developer to initiate the dialogue to resolve the questions. Mr. Wall stated that if the developer graded the road and surfaced the road, it would be the ideal time for the residents to create an association to address the maintenance issues. Mr. Kooharian emphasized that it should be set up ahead of time. Chairman Petersen added that the new residents would gain a benefit from having a plan already in place.
Dave Bilodeau of Degrass Road echoed his concern about traffic on Degrass Road and suggested it was the appropriate time to identify a more permanent way to fix Blue Castle. Mr. Bilodeau felt that the seashells would not be effective and that the road was typically filled with potholes. Mr. Bilodeau expressed concern about the increased traffic on Degrass if Blue Castle was not properly improved. Mr. Balzarini stated that the residents did not want to chip in for the costs to improve the road. Mr. Bilodeau also expressed concern about the added nitrogen over the watershed and Mr. Costa discussed the nitrogen aggregate plan that would be submitted for approval to the Board of Health and the DEP.
Jerry Warner of Blue Castle inquired about who would maintain Blue Castle during construction and noted that improvements, such as rock walls, could allow better marketing and a higher price for the homes. Chairman Petersen stated that the developer had a responsibility to himself as to how he would proceed with his own development.
Joanne Dorsey of Blue Castle expressed concern about the density in a 1-acre zoned area and asked for clarification for the width of the road. It was noted that the road would be 20 feet wide, which would be a standard sized road.
Mr. Rowley indicated that there would continue to be maintenance issues on Blue Castle and suggested that regular maintenance would be needed to keep it in its best condition for a non-paved surface. Mr. Rowley suggested the need for an exaggerated crown to improve runoff to the sides and minimize the development of potholes. Mr. Rowley also noted the importance of considering the location of each of the driveways and possible water collection areas. Chairman Petersen suggested use of a portable radar on Degrass in order to control speed. The DPW will be looking into the possibility and more information should be available at the next meeting.
Mr. Fudala reported that a water quality report will be needed, requiring 2 monitoring wells unless the Board of Health determined that it would be unnecessary. Additionally, the meeting with Plan Design/Review had not been completed but the plan proponent would return following Town Counsel’s research regarding the paving of Blue Castle. No recommendation was currently available from the Committee.
Chairman Petersen summarized that permission would be acquired from the abutters to re-grade the road, there would be further discussion regarding the development of an association and a construction traffic plan should be developed to prevent additional wear on Blue Castle. Mr. Costa suggested that they would look into it further. Mr. Balzarini also recommended establishing work hours. Mr. Rowley suggested that there would be times that both roads would need to be used but recommended a condition that would require the plan proponent to address road maintenance issues, such as potholes, and keep the road clear of debris.
Mr. Lebrano asked for clarification regarding the $500,000 estimate for the roadwork and also requested that all residents of Blue Castle be contacted. Mr. Wall agreed to send letters to all residents of Blue Castle.
MOTION: Mr. Balzarini made a motion to continue the public hearing to October 2nd at 8:00 p.m. Mr. Kooharian seconded the motion. All voted unanimously.
The Board recessed at 9:25 p.m. and reconvened at 9:30 p.m.
SPECIAL PERMITS
Applicant: National Development
Location: Corner of Old Barnstable Road and Route 151, identified on the Mashpee Assessors Maps as Map 66, Block 107 and Map 73, Blocks 30, 31, 46 and 47
Request: Approval of a Special Permit for an Assisted Living Facility “Bridges at Mashpee” (Project requires automatic referral to Cape Cod Commission as a mandatory DRI)
The Chair read for the record the request and Attorney Eliza Cox, of Nutter McLennan & Fish, represented the applicant. Ms. Cox reported that the plans had been developed for the project and an application had been submitted for a 54-memory care assisted living residence units and would exceed the Cape Cod Commission Development of Regional Impact threshold of 30 units, triggering an automatic referral to the Cape Cod Commission. Once reviewed by the Cape Cod Commission, the project would return to the Planning Board for local permitting. Any changes to the project and timeline updates would be communicated to the Town Planner.
MOTION: Mr. Kooharian made a motion to refer the application to the Cape Cod Commission. Mr. Balzarini seconded the motion. All voted unanimously.
Chairman Petersen signed the Cape Cod Commission referral.
Applicant: Windchime Point Condominium
Request: Permission to remove certain trees. Review of additional arborist reports, June 15 site visit, decisions taken and additional Board action required. (Continued from August 21)
The Chair read the request and Mr. Fudala reported that an email was received withdrawing the tree removal request.
Applicant: Jobs-Whitings Trust
Location: Area surrounding Job’s Fishing Road and proposed Market Street extension, identified on the Mashpee Assessors Maps as Map 74, Blocks 20 and 34.
Request: Approval of extension of time, until November 30, 2014, to initiate construction under Special Permit issued 3/5/08 for commercial development within the Mashpee Commons Jobs-Whiting 40B neighborhood. Previous extensions were granted until March 5, 2014. ZBA has extended 40B permit to 11/30/14.
Chairman Petersen read for the record the request for a time extension on the Special Permit. Since the request was a modification to the Special Permit, Mr. Fudala recommended that the Board vote to determine if a public hearing was necessary.
MOTION: Ms. Waygan made a motion that a public hearing was not required and notification of abutters on this modification of a Special Permit. Mr. Kooharian seconded the motion. All voted unanimously.
MOTION: Ms. Waygan made a motion for a Special Permit Extension for Jobs-Whiting Trust, Mashpee Commons, Jobs Whiting Road commercial space originally approved on March 5, 2008. Mr. Kooharian seconded the motion. All voted unanimously.
Ms. Waygan read the decision prepared by Mr. Fudala, which was signed by the Chair. The ZBA granted an extension for the same date.
Applicant: Southport on Cape Cod
Location: Southport Phase III, Buildings 48, 49, 50 & 51
Request: Decision regarding trees to be retained at Buildings 48, 49, 50 & 51
Mr. Fudala reported that Mr. Rowley had met with Ron Bonvie of Southport and their engineer and site contractor. Mr. Bonvie stated that the buildings to be constructed were located in a kettle hole. The only trees that could be saved had been circled on the plan, but Mr. Bonvie noted that the area would be surrounded by 200 feet and 100 feet of trees in two directions. Mr. Rowley and Mr. Fudala agreed with the plan. Mr. Bonvie indicated that he was consistently committed to planting additional trees at the development. Mr. Fudala drafted a memo identifiying the trees that would be saved.
MOTION: Ms. Waygan made a motion to approve the plan as presented with special care to save the trees as listed in the memo from Town Planner Tom Fudala dated 9/19/13 regarding Planning Board approval of certain tree removals. Mr. Kooharian seconded the motion. All voted unanimously.
Chairman Petersen signed the plan.
BOARD ITEMS
Old Business
Discussion of Greenways Proposal and Surrounding Commercial Property-Ms.
Waygan reported that she had sent an email to residents who previously attended meetings and it was expected that a meeting would be scheduled on a Saturday. A list was provided for Greenways outreach, including Conservation Trusts who may be able to make referrals.
- MMR Military Civilian Community Council-Update of MMR Joint Land Use
Study-Mr. Kooharian reported that there would soon be a meeting.
Design Review Committee-Mr. Cummings reported that there was no meeting.
Community Preservation Committee-Ms. Waygan reported that the Selectmen had questioned whether $600,000 was available for the boat ramp but the accountant confirmed that the funds were available. Ms. Waygan stated that CPA funds would need to be saved in order to pay off the debt in 2020, but funds would continue to be received from the State. Article 8 set aside funds for open space, historic and affordable housing. Article 9 funded $115,000 for phase 2 of the community park. Article 10 was for the boat ramp, believed to be the only access at low tide. Chairman Petersen inquired about the breakdown for the $600,000. Ms. Waygan noted that Ms. Laurent typically was under budget and the work was often completed ahead of time. Article 11 was for improvements in
Johns Pond. Article 12 was in the amount of $17,000 to rehabilitate the basketball court at the Boys & Girls Club. Article 13 was $115,000 for the shellfish propagation project.
Charter Review-Ms. Waygan stated that there was room in the charter for interpretation and clarification and reported that the public hearing would be held on November 7 at 6:30. The public was encouraged to complete the survey online.
Environmental Oversight Committee-Chairman Petersen reported that a letter had been sent to the Board of Selectmen and other town departments, encouraging their support of the Cape Cod Commission sponsored DCPC to manage the use of nitrogen in fertilizer. It was noted that nitrogen in fertilizer was the second contributing factor to nitrogen in the waterways, and completely within control of the residents. Management of the nitrogen could assist with the eventual costs of sewering. In addition, a letter will be sent from the EOC supporting grants being sought by the Conservation Commission.
Historic District Commission- No update
New Business
BOS Request Regarding Cape Cod Commission Secession-Mr. Fudala stated that Ms. Mason sent an email requesting Planning Board consideration of emails received regarding secession from the Cape Cod Commission. Mr. Fudala suggested that the emails seem to be related to Cape Cod Commission Reform, Cape Cod Commission Monitor, Steve Ford and Ron Beatty. It was believed that the recent activity was in relation to the DCPC. Many of the emails were unsigned. Mr. Balzarini stated that the Cape Cod Commission was created to assist towns but questioned their assistance with Mashpee Commons. It was suggested that there were no compelling reasons to call for a public hearing regarding the Commission and there were not enough facts or figures to join the movement. The regional
organization can be at times frustrating but overall it worked to benefit the towns. There was discussion about being able to ask questions about Mashpee funds available at the Cape Cod Commission. The Chair will try to attend the upcoming Board of Selectmen meeting. There was discussion regarding Mashpee Commons and the Cape Cod Commission.
C. Rowley Expense Vouchers-Invoices were received in the amount of $190 for Southport and $1187.50 for regular Planning Board services.
MOTION: Ms. Waygan made a motion to pay Mr. Rowley $190 for his services to Southport. Mr. Kooharian seconded the motion. All voted unanimously.
MOTION: Ms. Waygan made a motion to pay $1187.50 to Mr. Rowley for his services in August 2013 for Ockway Highlands, Savanna’s Path, Quashnet Valley and meeting at Marster’s Office regarding new profile plan for Quashnet Valley. Mr. Balzarini seconded the motion. All voted unanimously.
The vouchers were signed by Board members.
WATERWAYS LICENSES
None at this time
CORRESPONDENCE
- cc of FEMA letter to Selectmen regarding Flood Insurance Rate Map Flood Risk Datasets and Products
- David Boucher, R.H. White Inc. – July 2013 SouthCape Village Discharge Monitoring Report N=5.2
ADJOURNMENT
MOTION: Mr. Balzarini made a motion to adjourn. Ms. Waygan seconded the motion. All voted unanimously. The meeting adjourned at 10:20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Jennifer M. Clifford
Board Secretary
LIST OF DOCUMENTS
-Tom Fudala Tree Removal Memo to Ron Bonvie
-Charles Rowley 8/19 Letter Regarding Definitive Subdivision Plan Review, Savanna’s Path
-Glen Harrington 9/13 Memo Regarding 36 Savanna’s Path
-Brian Wall Letter Regarding BCDM Development
-Joyce Mason Memo Regarding Road Buildout
-National Development Application for Special Permit
-Plans for Bridges at Mashpee
-Joe Mooney Email to Withdraw Windchime Tree Removal Request
-George Petersen Email to Joe Mooney Regarding Windchime Tree Removal
-Jobs-Whitings Trust Letter of Extension
-Joyce Mason Email Regarding Cape Cod Commission Secession
-Emails & Documentation Regarding Cape Cod Commission Secession
-Greenways List of Contacts
| 
