Laserfiche WebLink
ASHPEE CONSERVATION COMMISStON <br /> MEFnNG OF DECEMBER 1 , 1986 <br /> COMMISSIONERS PRESENT, V. Louise Behrrtman, Gertrude Ferriday, Elliot Rosenberg, <br /> March duPont, Carol Jacobson, Mary Ma r ters. <br /> Also present were John 'ala rkonda and Heather Urquhart. <br /> Ms Behrman left the room during discussions of an Order of Conditions for the <br /> Pine Hill Estate project. <br /> The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. <br /> - Hyman M i r l i ss , 86 Sunset Circle. Edward Govon i and Mr. M i r l i ss presenting . <br /> The finished blueprint and Locus were presented. Abutter notices were presented <br /> also. <br /> Mr. Govon i stated he started construction -with a permit pulled. Mr . M l r l l s had <br /> requested a Determination of Applicability not realizing that all the walls were <br /> coming down, the roof removed except for a bedroom and bath, foundation wa 1 l s <br /> removed with new walls to be put i n. M r . Govon i Called the Building Inspector <br /> and stated he would prefer, rather than to ra i se everything up to go under- the <br /> structure with a Bobcat, to dismantle tyre top deck, move the section being left <br /> over to the side and going in and ' F fig {ng wi th noth i ng overhead . He stated that <br /> apparently they should have come here to Conservation first. <br /> Mrs . Ferriday stated it +.{gas the under tand # ng of the commission that there would <br /> be minimal change in the construction and it would be from the foundation up. <br /> Mr . M i r l i ss 1.,ias going to do his kitchen area and remove two trees . <br /> M r. Mir 1 i s stated when he came to the Commission at the first hearing , he did <br /> not have a contractor and he gave the description in 1 aymen ' terms showing <br /> what the end result would be according to the plans submitted which is exactly <br /> the way it will be with the exception that now there will be a basement which <br /> came on line afterward. ghat was applied for in the original application and <br /> what is on the plan and the end result will he the same. <br /> Mrs . ,Jacobson stated Mr. M rl i ss had stated he ,�jas going to enclose a portion <br /> of the existing deck, which does not exist anymore. Everything is gone. <br /> Mr. Mirliss stated according to the plans the existing foundation had to code <br /> out anyviay and them was no other- way of doing i t . Mrs . Jacobson countered, <br /> ''But, you did not tel I us that". M r . Mirliss stated he did not know it at <br /> the time. <br /> Mr. Govon i s to ted the p 1 an subm i tted s totes , remove ex i s t i ng wa l l . Mrs . <br /> Jacobson pointed out that the Notice of Intent did not reflect that, Mr . <br /> Govon i s to ted he saw tha t of to r he go t i n o 1 ved and ha s reapp l i ed to conf o rm <br /> to the drawing that Mr . Mir 1 i s s had. There is no more digging than would have <br /> been with this blueprint, as far as being close to the water. <br /> Ms Behr-man stated the problem i s that the commission would have followed very <br /> different procedures . <br /> Mr. Govoni stated hay bales have been placed and nothing is going into the pond . <br /> There i5 an- existing retaining vial 1 .here ,and the distance from the closest par t <br /> o 'L'-h,.-1 <br /> over -7Fe-e.!- <br />