Laserfiche WebLink
Conservation Commission <br /> April 4 1991 <br /> i Page 7. <br /> involved with the adjudicatory case with that and it's connected to the lower one, <br /> so I walked that line with a consultant -we are paying for the other one and this <br /> a very knowledgeable consultant, he doesn't agree with the lines either. In other <br /> words, we have someone else who waled there, at no charge to you, he didn't flag <br /> the lines but he doesn't agree with them either. PULSONE: Can I have his studies?) <br /> That was a verbal one but if he does those lines as part of our other study. l don't <br /> see why not. It may be possible, since weeIre paying for the study on the upper lot <br /> since we re in the adjudicatory process and the two lots are connected legally, it <br /> may be that he could flag those too and we could -share the cost. <br /> MRS. PULSOIE: You're sang those two lots are connected legally, under what law? <br /> When were they connected legally? <br /> Under the Wetlands Protection Act, if you have ars inteirn ttent strewn or <br /> flow.. . .(MRS. PULS NE: Has that been proven? In our estimation, yes. . .(MRS. PULS N : <br /> But DEP hasn't made it. Ruled on it, no, you're right. (MRS. PC SO : So, 1.t's not. <br /> Ido) but even under our own bylaw, if DEP, CH,- 131.40 did not exi <br />