|
Conservation Commission
<br /> December 15, 1988
<br /> Page 9,
<br /> Mrs,,' Jacobson stated their application- was received on , . the _
<br /> first hearing. was on 9/22.,, that' s not a year ago. Mr. Jacobs insisted,
<br /> it was over- a year ago.. Jack Brown, on ars informal basis, cane ,.in.-:"___-
<br /> here.
<br /> Mrs. Simmons stated, ."Don' t tell-. us- then -sir, .i f we weren' t all
<br /> sitting here' . . . .Mr. Jacobs 'continued,-. *And the informal meeting said
<br /> okay, look s� like you' ve got . a viable project, please go. to the Board- ',
<br /> of Appeals" .
<br /> Mrs, Jacobson stated she could not ,imagine the commission would say.__
<br /> that anything that covers this. amount would look like a� cable project.-
<br /> Mr.
<br /> roject.-r, Jacobs stated, "Okay, you don' t even want to listen, you' re
<br /> sitting here yelling at me. `"- _
<br /> Mrs. Jacobson. stated he was the � one- doing the yelling and, she was. sick-,
<br /> of: Ital .-
<br /> Mr.,
<br /> tr#, Jacobs. stated. he.- was not,-yelling, - he was , trying to: make _.._-.
<br /> statement, they .we,nt.. to--the Board of Appeals, , the Board -.of ppeal.s-.-,-,, .
<br /> said they don' t think .it' s in their ,jurisdiction, so back to the
<br /> Commission. They came back and the cone scion said no-, they wanted
<br /> them to go back to the Board of Appeals. They did, they got their
<br /> approval and came back here again and these issues were brought up and
<br /> they have to try and resolve them. He stated all he is getting is a
<br /> lot of craziness.
<br /> Ir. Rosenberg stated the only thing that could have happened here i
<br /> somebody. c ou I d, have come to t he, onserat i on Officer and asked- about-. -
<br /> the
<br /> ked- about-. -
<br /> the project. Not before- the Commission, because nothing is heard .----
<br /> except
<br /> eard :-_-
<br /> e cept as it- is - advertised-,,: Somebody may have gone to the Conservation
<br /> Officer and the officer looked- at this and said since they are so .
<br /> close to the water they have to go to the Board of Appeals and get a,. -,..
<br /> variance before. they could present the.- matterf.. r* Jacobs stated they.. ..
<br /> did that. Mr. Rosenberg stated the .' Board of Appealslooked. at it . and--.-:...-
<br /> stated it was not considered .here-ir-.-Mr. Jacobs stated they went back.
<br /> and forth--.'
<br /> Ir. Burns stated.. they didn' t come before. the Board, a they could have..-;-.-
<br /> gone to the Officer a year-- ago-.
<br /> Mr. Rosenberg painted out the con ission can hear nothing- or discuss.:,.
<br /> nothing until they file a Notice of Intent and can' t accept a Not ice..:. :_
<br /> of Intent unless, by statute, they have gotten all the other permits.*
<br /> That' s why the f-f i cer told them to So to the Board of Appeals and if
<br /> the waiver is received. . r. Jacobs stated they did.) But we have. been
<br /> listening to this- only since the end of September# We had a hearing a
<br /> made a certain suggestion and now you' re back in front of us*
<br /> Mr. Pavelic - stated as far as the original deck went, the, original .-
<br /> eel ing was that based on the topographer shown on this plan which was
<br /> found to be in error and they did go back and have the lot retopoed.
<br /> and as can now be seen on this l ate st. plan, this swal a as it were is
<br /> actually further away from the building than it: shows..,here-.. This. point.-..
<br /> remains. the same and. -the ,swale is over about ll feet. In effect. the
<br /> s takes actual I y do show up as be ing on the h i Sher* ,area; ' th ey are,- ot,..,-
<br /> at the bottom of'. Fre- s al a as they. appeared, to be here., The additional-'_
<br /> concern that the deck, as proposed here, would b , as it' s in this
<br /> Swale here, causing harmful effects upon the drainage characteristics.
<br />
|