Members Present: Elaine
Anderson, Dieter Groll, Lynne Martin, David
Hale and Jack McMahon.
Members Absent: Dennis Minsky (excused).
Others Present: Ellen C.
Battaglini (Recording Secretary).
PUBLIC MEETING
Co-Chair
Elaine Anderson called the Public Meeting to order at
PUBLIC
STATEMENTS: None.
MINUTES:
Notice of Intent
Application by Rex McKinsey, Harbormaster, for
a Notice of Intent under the
Presentation:
Public
Comment: None.
Commission
Discussion: The Commission questioned Mr. McKinsey and Ms.
Bowden. The Commission concluded that they would prefer to separate the two
projects and include only the rehabilitation of the courtesy float and the
sewer connection as an NOI, while the minor improvements to the Waterfront Memorial
Park Improvement Project would be dealt with as an Administrative Review. The
Commission decided to impose the same Order of Conditions for this project as
for the MacMillan Wharf Reconstruction Project.
Elaine Anderson moved to
consider the Waterfront Memorial Park Improvement Project for Administrative
Review by the Conservation Agent, Brian Carlson, Lynne Martin seconded and it
was so voted, 5-0.
Notice of Intent
Application by Federal Highway Administration,
Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division (EFLHD),
in cooperation with the National Park Service (NPS), for a
Notice of Intent under the Massachusetts Wetlands Protection Act M.G.L. c. 131,
§ 40 and the
Presentation:
David Dajc, with EFLHD, appeared to present the application. The work
will primarily be a reconstruction at the intersection of Route 6 and
Public
Comment: None.
Commission
Discussion: The Commission questioned Mr. Dajc. The Commission concluded
that they would need more time to study the material submitted before rendering
a decision. The Commission requested that the applicant submit enough copies of
plan sheet D-7(the wetland hand-out), sheet B-3 (pavement surface), sheet M-4
(erosion sediment control) and the sheet entitled “Temporary Inlet Protection”,
Standard Detail #157-2, for all of the Commissioners. The Commission requested
that the applicant flag or mark the site in question to indicate where the 100’
buffer line is located, mark the section of pavement that will be under
reconfiguration, and, to the best of his ability and with the resources
available to him, make it easier for Commissioners who will be making a site
visits to understand the location and scope of the proposed work. The Commission
also requested that the applicant elucidate the intent of the project, as that
was not made clear in his presentation. The applicant requested a continuance
until the
Lynne Martin moved to
grant the request for a continuance until the April 15, 2008, David Hale
seconded and it was so voted, 5-0.
Request for
Determination of Applicability
Application by Joel Shaw (
Lynne Martin moved to
grant the request for a continuance to the April 22, 2008 hearing, Jack McMahon
seconded and it was so voted, 5-0.
Request for
Determination of Applicability
Application by Shoreline Construction for a
Request for Determination of Applicability under the
Lynne Martin moved to
grant the request for a continuance to the April 22, 2008 hearing, Jack McMahon
seconded and it was so voted, 5-0.
Review
of Annual Town Meeting Warrant Articles
To determine the number of Commissioners in favor
or opposed to the Town Meeting Warrant Articles that reference the natural
environment.
ARTICLE
24: Elaine Anderson read the letter from Kopelman
& Paige with Attorney Kathleen Connolly’s suggestions and concerns
regarding Warrant Article 24. The Commission discussed the letter.
12-9: The Commission discussed the definition of
‘passive recreation’.
12-16: The Commission discussed Attorney Connelly’s
advice that this Section is not necessary.
Lynne Martin moved to
proceed with Warrant Article 24 as written, with the omission of Section 12-16,
inclusive of subsections B and C, Dieter Groll seconded and it was so voted,
5-0.
ARTICLE
17: The Commission briefly discussed this Warrant
Article even though it was going to be indefinitely postponed. There was no
consensus on recommending or not recommending passage and no vote was taken.
ARTICLE
32: The
Commission briefly discussed this Warrant Article and decided that they had no
recommendation regarding passage. Elaine Anderson moved that the
Conservation Commission issue a ‘no recommendation’ concerning this Warrant
Article, Lynne Martin seconded and it was so voted, 4-0-1 (Dieter Groll abstaining).
CONSERVATION COMMISSION STATEMENTS:
Elaine Anderson mentioned the resource survey proposed by
Rogue Wave Field Services. This discussion will be postponed until the
Lynne Martin said that she had come across the Town of
ANY OTHER BUSINESS:
Ted Malone will be appearing before the Cape Cod Commission
for review on
There was a letter back from the DEP acknowledging the
Chapter 91 filing for the property located at
There was an e-mail sent to Brian in regard to 320R
There was a letter from Brian Carlson to Jon Nordahl concerning the incomplete status of his NOI application that copied to the Commission.
ADJOURNMENT: Lynne Martin moved to
adjourn at
These minutes were approved by a vote of the Conservation Commission at their meeting on ___________________, 2008.
Respectfully submitted,
Ellen C. Battaglini
Approved by ________________________________ on _____________, 2008
Dennis Minsky and