Laserfiche WebLink
■ <br /> lashpee Conservation Commission <br /> Meeting of June 6 , 1985 <br /> Page Four A <br /> Ms Dardano emphasized that this is a very s ens J tive area and it <br /> appears that the proposed well would be practically in the water, <br /> Deans Pond is owned by New Seabury Corporation; however, We Sullivan <br /> said that they had received written approval for this project. Un- <br /> fortunately, he did not have a copy of that letter with him. <br /> It was expressed that the plans are rather incomplete as submitted. <br /> All physical limits must be indicated on the plans such as off-the <br /> road parking and other structural confinements , <br /> " rim : ----cwl-led-fofurther <br /> As there were none , she stated that an on-site inspection would be <br /> made and the petition would be taken under advisement, <br /> Barbara C . B eb (Scott L, Barton - e s i er <br /> This petition is to construct an addition to existing dwelling on-sfisting of dining room, study and garage at #42 Fiddler Crab Lane , <br /> New Seabury, Assessor' s Map los, Lot #103, <br /> r. # Barton was presentaxed submitted plans ;for a Request for Det- <br /> ermination of Applicability. Ms . Bardano infor ed him that the <br /> Request wasinappropriate for this project and suggested that the <br /> applicant file a Notice of latent. <br /> Mr. Barton will submit a. Notice of Intent on behalf of his ,client in <br /> the near future . The filing submitted for this hearing was . withdrawn. <br /> Ste.phen C a.D .lla (Wm' ,, M, Warwick & Assoc . , Inc . MW Agent) <br /> This petition is a Request for Determination of Applicability for <br /> the -proposed construction of a three-bedroom dwelling with deck and <br /> sewage system at Lot #50 Cranberry Lane , Map #23, This location is <br /> n S antuit Pond. <br /> Chris Clark representative of the agent, presented plans . He stated <br /> that the filing as submitted was incorrect in that a portion of the <br /> deck, approximately ' will, in fact, be in the buffer zone . <br /> r. lark said that it was originally intended to have the entire <br /> project located outside of the buffer zone ; but because of the septic <br /> system this was not possible . He further stated that the well would <br /> be the closest activity being approximately 60' From the water. The <br />