Laserfiche WebLink
Conservation Commission <br /> July 9, 1992 <br /> Page TO <br /> Notice received from DEP, the dock has been licensed. <br /> Public comments were requested; there were none. <br /> Vim: Motion made and seconded to dose the hearing. <br /> HEARING CLOSED, <br /> JANET HAM 31 Keel way, continued from June 4. 1992• <br /> CONTINUED TO JULY 23P 1992 - 8:50 p.m. at the request of the applicant, <br /> 9:05 WRI 2 Spoondrift Way, continued from June +. 1992. John Slavinsky <br /> presenting. Mark Burtis was also present; they did the work on the floats. He <br /> advised they took out the old floats and replaced thea with new, exact same width <br /> and length. ACOS dated back to 1960. It was assumed they had Chapter 91. He had <br /> not recorded it. <br /> Mrs. siumons asked if the work was done -without an order of Conditions' <br /> . &=tis stated the Conservation Agent, at the time, gave penussion to take the <br /> old floats out and put new floats in. <br /> Mr. Slavinsky stated the did have a pe��t, they built lt the dock� ramp and one float. <br /> the two floats and T-float were installed in 1968. <br /> Mr. Btis stated there is a plan on file including the lengths and widths. <br /> Mr. Sherman stated they have no Order of Conditions or perm.t. The current config- <br /> uration does not meet performance standards. He would like to see an elevated. <br /> structure. The ,Commission should require a retrofit to meet the performance <br /> standards. The plan shows an elevated structure. <br /> Mr. Slavinsky would propose to raise it to five feet. The client is adamant about <br /> keeping the floats as they axe. <br /> Mr. Sherman was, adamant about meeting the performance standards. <br /> Ms Lannik asked if they are proposing to go in for Chapter 92 and was told they are, <br /> for the 99 year. <br /> Mr. Sherman stated the change in elevation is okay, just keep the sane footpri <br />