Laserfiche WebLink
IL <br /> Conservation Coi.ssion <br /> November 1, 1990 <br /> Page 5. <br /> 8:15 JAMES CADGER for the approval of "As Built" wood construction in excess of <br /> approved projects at 8 Frog Pond Close. Dago sanicki presenting. Two orders of <br /> Conditions were issued on the property. stairway and dock were constructed and <br /> the dock was in a different configuration than as built plan. Two pilings were <br /> spaced further which located the dock 5 Foot further than permitted. An illegal <br /> wing was also constructed. <br /> Shown on the plan is an 18 ft. ramp connecting the dock and stairway. They are <br /> requesting everything as constructed be approved. The dock was originally designed <br /> with a 4 foot wide landing way which is now actually 6 feet Wide. The ramp was not <br /> previously approved by the Conmiission. This filing is as requested by the Agent. <br /> It is After-The-Fact with double fees. <br /> Mr. Coffey stated the shellfish warden and. Harbormaster should be contacted con- <br /> cerning the size and shading impact o % extra width of cantilevered wings. <br /> 5 <br /> Mr. Sani.cki advised there were two different owners and it was constructed simult- <br /> aneously under two orders of conditions. He was unaware there was an order for the <br /> stairway. <br /> Mr. York asked if the ramp i's 5 Feet off the ground and was told it is. <br /> CONTINUED To ND ER 29 1990 - 7:30 p9mis <br /> :3o NEW SEABURY CORP. for an amendment to a Negative Determination of Applicability <br /> on a proposal for maintenance of snow fencing along Popponesset Beach area. Michael <br /> tarot ke presenting. He advised several years ago they proposed to do snow fencing <br /> along the entire area to protect the grass area and develop the dune. It was sugg- <br /> ested during the Popponesset Cottages hearing for the septic, due to a deterioration <br /> in the duality of the dune if there were a flood it would wash out. <br /> Mr. Sherman advised that Atty. Glen wood, representing Mr. McNamara, asked that no <br /> final decision be made tonight as he is researching deeds to see what, if any, legal <br /> access is granted in deeds to this area. He felt this request should be honored. <br /> Mr. Grotke stated that is a different issue; no one has approached him from any <br /> community to discuss this. He noted that on lana court plans there is shown <br /> large way to get to the beach. That is a legal issue which he is not prepared <br /> to get into. He asked if Mr. Sherman had knowledge of a suit being filed? <br /> Mr. Sherman stated there is not. <br /> Mr. Grotzke felt there had been a problem with abutter notification which may have <br /> triggered concern. He advised the attorney was using an improper scale. A plan <br /> used to determine abutters was Faxed to him; he called to apologize to Mr. Grotke <br /> and stated there was no problem with the way the abutter list was developed. <br /> . tarot ke advised the access will be reopening when they put in the new walkover <br /> structure that will be in the order of Conditions to be issued for that cottage. <br /> Mr. Sherman suggested holding open the question whether New Seabury should provide <br /> documentation of proper abutter notification until. Atty. Wood is contacted. <br /> Mr. Coffey asked if they do their own abutters list'? Mr. Grotke advised they are <br /> certified by the Town in each case. He was not certain this was submi <br />