I know I'm one of those 'upstarts' who blew in from the big city and think I should spread environmental awareness throughout the land, but honestly!
Now some people in Salisbury want to repeal the town's wetlands bylaw. At least it's not the town wanting to repeal its own bylaws. And,no, I'm not saying that Newbury wants to repeal its wetlands bylaws!
According to the Daily News, Kevin Henderson of 61 Atlantic Ave. and 16 other registered voters filed the petition that appears as Article 22 in hopes of getting voters to repeal the town's wetlands protection bylaw, which was passed on Nov. 27, 1989. The bylaw relates to protection of Salisbury's barrier beach, flood plains, wetlands and aquifer areas.
But the town has stepped up to debunk the myth that eliminating (or scoffing at) local bylaws would be of any use whatsoever.
According to Town Manager Neil Harrington, Salisbury's Conservation Commission is the local enforcement authority for the state of Massachusetts and the state's Wetlands Protection Act and Rivers Protection Act. Eliminating Salisbury's wetlands bylaw wouldn't dissolve the Conservation Commission, nor eliminate the authority given by the state to enforce conservation laws.
"Eliminating Salisbury's bylaw means that everything at the beach would have to conform to the state's standards," Harrington said. "In the case of paving at the beach, for example — which is a big bone of contention with some people at the beach — if Salisbury's bylaw is eliminated and the Conservation Commission's authority is effaced, paving issues at the beach would go straight to the DEP. And its standards on paving at the beach are more stringent than Salisbury's."
I could insert here stuff about the big fight that Newbury had last year with the DEP over paving the dirt side streets on Plum Island as part of the water/sewer project and that asphalt parking lot at PI center (the one that is now filled with sand).
I should note that the much larger Newburport-owned parking lot, at Plum Island point, is paved. It is well back from the water - but it still should be gravel.
But - about that last paragraph from the DN - what is the "bone of contention?" Do the "some people at the beach" want it paved, or not?
Oh, why do I continue to aggravate people? Why can't I be a good little blogger?
Friday, May 16, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
While we're on the topic of the point parking lot, you do realize that the city is going the re-build the bathrooms without flood elevating the building (how Newbury-like). Oh and they are relocating it over by the playground.....
No, Bubba, I did not realize that. How lovely. I'll try and get more info on that.
I do hope, though, that they fix the dip in the parking lot by where the bathrooms are now - you know, where there's always a pool of water of uncertain origin.
Thanks for the info and for using the nickname!
You can check it all out in the ConCom meeting minutes on the city's website. Essentially, the city objected on cost and safety concerns - which apparently don't apply to homeowners since we're all rich and well-armed.....
Fix the dip ? Surely you're not suggesting they place fill on a barrier island ?
NO, I meant when they tear up the concrete or whatever that is and replace it with gravel ... you know, in my dreams ... I just liked the "of uncertain origin" bit so I stuck it in there. Artistic license.
Thanks!
Post a Comment