Laserfiche WebLink
Conservation Commission <br /> December 3 , 1987 <br /> Page 6 . <br /> STEVEN ANTHONY cane before the commission regarding ars "Enforcement <br /> Order dated October 1 , 1987 for a retaining wall at Summersea Road not <br /> on the original plans. The amendment to the Notice of Intent was <br /> received and read into prior minute' s. The original landscape plan and <br /> site plan was presented. Mr. Anthony stated when the prper,ty was pur- <br /> chased two years ago it was accompanied by a set of plans for a hone, <br /> foundation, landscaping, etc. , which was approved by Conservation. He <br /> was unaware the seller did not convey to him a landscape plan to <br /> correspond with the plan on file with the Commission. <br /> Ms Behrman stated the Order of Conditions may have required a land- <br /> scape plan be filed for approval and Mr. Anthony assumed the approval <br /> had been gotten with the Order, creating a chain of events problem. <br /> Ir. Anthony asked why. 'the Enforcement Order had been issued and Mr . <br /> Rosenberg stated because this plan was not approved. <br /> Ms B hr an stated the additional problem i s .the retaining wall , a <br /> structure- not discussed at the hearing. She ash d how high the <br /> wall is and was told, not quite six feet. She ..adv-i.s .d by state <br /> regulations , anything over 5 feet high has to have .building permit <br /> and there are state codes about safety barriers.. <br /> :Mr. Anthony stated there was no digging in to -any -new vegetation. They <br /> went around a tree to avoid cutting it down. The rationale behind the <br /> height of the wall was to establish a level grade fr.oz _a ­no-raal step <br /> below the walkout door to the actual end of the r-e-taining wall . <br /> !s Behrman questioned the deck with stairs delineated on the plan. ;fir. <br /> Anthony stated there is going to be a decd si-mil.ar to the plan which <br /> projects the sane distance buz is longer, left to right. The elevation <br /> between the deck and the grade proposed is eight feet. <br /> -Mr. Rosenberg stated he noted on the plan that this -is the subject of <br /> a special permit # 155216 from the Board of- Appeals. If construction is <br /> not described within that special permit, that -is a Violation' of <br /> Zoning bylaws. <br /> !s B.ehrman advised Mr. Anthony to establish -whetherthis retaining <br /> wall is included in that plan. She suggested he first establish <br /> compliance with the Board of Appeals permit or whether a zoning <br /> variance is required and discuss this with the Building Inspector as <br /> enforcement officer for the Appeals Board . Then it will be necessary <br /> to make sure what is on file in the Notice ofIntent' agrees . wit what <br /> is on the site . No C'er i f i nate of Compliance would be issued i f there <br /> is a deviation . <br /> r . os nb r�g suggested he have his to me get aha: was <br /> origins Y i led in the Registry o Deed . That Js par* of his title <br /> and was one of the conditions or restrictions on the title that he <br /> bought and he should have been advised at the time . <br /> Mr . Anthony asked .;4f there was anything in particular that nt nds out <br /> on the lot . Mrs . Ferriday sated the ero ior� uSt be s�. p end t ip <br /> gall might be the answer * Lisa agreed . "yrs . Ferriday stated she did <br /> not reglize there was a reserved area next door which has ben- <br /> stripped also . <br />