Laserfiche WebLink
Conservation Commission <br /> July 1 , 1992 <br /> Page 9. <br /> MtR TRUST: There was discussion of the order of -condi t ions. <br /> Mr. .Sherman advised there will be a total of four pilings. <br /> Mr. Homeyer stated he is against this project because he exceeded his original Penut. <br /> Mr. Sherman questioned, the basis for denial that would be acceptable to DBP, <br /> Ms Lannik read from the transcript of the Minutes -of rune 25, the continued hearing. <br /> Mr. Desrosiers also had an objection. <br /> Mr. Sherman will listen to. the tape of the hearing and report back to the commission. <br /> =40 NM MOM&LOS for a 10 foot extension and 8 ft. by 16 ft. float to an ex- isting <br /> dock; addition tion f stairs from an existing deck; and the 'addition of 50 foot to an ex- <br /> i ting stone revetment at 22 Crosstree Way. Mrs. ManA , <br /> Ilos presented abutter notific- <br /> ation receipts. <br /> Mr. Sherman asked the age of the house and was told it is seven years old. There is a <br /> question of the perp tability of the revetment. It was noted it is alread there, but <br /> the extra section may not be allowed under the law. <br /> Dr. Mandalos asked about an emergency situation. <br /> Ms Dannik asked if there are any adjacent homes with revetments. D . Mandalos advised <br /> there are; itgoes around the cornu. Hayden's continues onto their property, but not <br /> i <br /> all the way, t stops about two-thirds, <br /> . Sherman advised there is evidence of storm damage., however, he believes there is <br /> prohibition for a house built after 1978. There is a pre--existing permit for the dock <br /> and float. <br /> i <br /> Mr. Sherman advised the total length is 52 feet with the extension of the walkway, ramp <br /> and "T" float. There will be a fee adjustment. He advised the Mandaloses were poorly <br /> served by their engineer. 'here are no details; DEP neer and comments have not been <br /> received. <br /> Mr. Desrosiers advised dimensions would bepp o�ately 68 feet, 40 feet existing. <br /> The Commission has been asking floats to be 200 s.f. , this would be 256 s.f. He asked <br /> if they would consider less <br /> . Mandalos stated they meed the length. <br /> Mrs. Simmons stated the omission must have details on the revetment and of the work <br /> as it i going to progress. It should have been pout into the narrative, step by step. <br /> Mr. Desrosle s listed, how damage will be prevented to the salt marsh, how stones will <br /> be placed and ,stockpiled. <br /> Dr, Mandalos advised the gall is not very high; it is only 1-1/2 to 2 feet. <br /> Mrs, S1mmOns stated the existing wall is in good condition with no washing out observed. <br /> She moved that the hearing be continued to a date certain. <br /> Public comments were requested; there were none. <br /> Mr. Sherman stated the question is whether an eroding bark contributes sediment. <br /> This will need Board of Appeals approval. Mrs. Mandalos had rot applied because she <br />