Laserfiche WebLink
Conservation Commission <br /> October 18, 1990 <br /> Page 4. <br /> Mrs. Snons stated the small cottage was not to be enlarged. <br /> Mr. Abrahamson continued, 1367 is also much like 65 and 66. The existing trees which <br /> are to remain are shown. -There are no paths going dawn the coastal bank on the three <br /> lots. <br /> 13 8, no paths, insi Jficant cutting of trees. <br /> 1369, no pathway, <br /> 1370, existing beach stairs; also has gazebo. Noted that if any alteration, to be <br /> responsibility of the homeowners association. It is necessary to remove some pines. <br /> 1371 - Middle building. <br /> ii s. Simons asked what would happen if the homeowners association falls apart? <br /> Mr. Homeyer asked if everyone who purchases property would have to ,loin the homeowners <br /> association? Mr. Grotzke stated they would and the Architectural Review Comnlittee <br /> will oversee all single family homes. . omeyer felt that would resolve any problem <br /> as the association would be responsible. <br /> .1372 - Nothing site specific; landscaping is on the plan. <br /> 1373 - Shown an existing path, to be abandoned; new vegetation shown. <br /> 1374 - Has a p a.th;barrier plantings shown to stop pedestrian traffic. <br /> 1375 -- Is identical.. <br /> The other item is the drive and how to handle removal and restoration of the existing <br /> ramp. For uniformity, contours will be filled with material from the new ramp. There <br /> are paths and the Lawn area disappears between 74 and 75 Bch will be revegetated with <br /> native materials. <br /> 1376 - Has the new ramp. The draft order of Conditions parallels the previous three <br /> except for the elevated boardwalk, <br /> 1377, 1378 and 1379 are not addressed. <br /> The septic has not been closed on 77 or 78. 1379 does not have a cottage, but they <br /> are proposing restoration of the bank. <br /> Mr. Coffey suggested closing 1365 through 1376, continuing 1377 and coming back in <br /> with 1378 and 1379, with the understanding drive access would not hold things up. <br /> Mr. Grotke agreed. <br /> VOTE: Motion made and seconded to close the hearings for Lots 1365 through 1376, <br /> continuing 1377 and New Seabury to come back in for 1378 and 1379. <br /> Mrs. Simmons stated she would like to see 1375 again, in terms of the coastal bank <br /> and the possibility of changing the patio. <br /> VOTE: Motion rade and seconded to rescind the vote to close-the bearings, <br /> VOTE: Motion made and seconded to close the hear-Ings for lets 1365 through 1376 with <br /> the exception of 1375 and to continue the hearings for lots 1375, 13771 1378 <br /> and 1379, <br />