7/27/1989 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes

Home Browse Search

S July 27, 1989 — 'age 5. coastal bark, the way we have tonight* The graphic that you`. have in the report provided demqstrates the two cases we have talked about: 1. the top of the bank in both cases is at 10 year flood elevation plus the sea level rise consideration but there 's the minimum buffer zone to be considered 100 feet landward or that or the most significant break in slope, whichever is greater. I Aust want to emphasize that what we' re suggesting is a coastal bank be defined differently for the reason that it only provides a vertical, buffer; it does not provide sediment to an adjacent beach. The perfect contract to this type of a bark is Maushop village. There is no doubt that the top of the bank should be at the top of that land form and the 100 t. jurisdiction. NORMAN YES: In closing, for the New Seabury Corp. , we world ask the commission if you could make a determination upon this matter within the time limit allowed. We would like' to have that decision and close this tonight. G. SIMMONS: As far as the Commission, we have a great deal of information to digest and it would be ridiculous for us to try to give a determination tonight. HAYES: Is that the reason you gave a date earlier, before the meeting. SIMMONS: We would like to at least gear- the presentation from our consultant before we crake any decision. BOB AY: I air pleased to hear one issue has been resolved since the last meeting with the New Seabury people and their consultants. The last meeting we had no coastal banks and now we have some to deal with so at least we have resolved one of the issues, that coastal banks do exist. 1 perhaps may have missed the point that Stan was trying to make in reminding the Commission they have a bylaw. My understanding of bylaws is that bylaws can only increase regulatory control, the resource boundaries, the performance standards, etc. They cannot lessen the protection that's already afforded under state lana and this Commission is bound by 131.4 0, the wetland protection act, it's regulations and guidelines, policies, standard operating procedures, etc. , that have come down through the years and to imply that perhaps this Commission has latitude here to treat coastal banks or other resources differently because they have a bylaw in effect _is erroneous. Since most of the discussion is on the coastal bank, I ' ll only briefly ooIt ent on the put-ported d isolated wetland subject to flooding vs whether itF� bordering vegetated wetland.