7/27/1989 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes

Home Browse Search

July 27, 1989 Page 7. the most significant break above the i o year flood elevation. I think in some cases we might be giving up 50, loo feet; jurisdiction in this particular case. I appreciate all that 1P, through Stan, has evidenced here in terms of the functionality of the bank and in teras of the portion of the bank that is below the 100 year flood elevation being that portion. of the bank that has function and I am in complete agreement with understanding and that position. But, it bathers me to see that we' re now redefining, in my opinion, past DECUB practice that has been spelle-d out in superceding orders and also adjudicatory decisions, standard operating procedure out of the southeastern office. It bothers me that we' re seemingly throwing that inf'or-mation by the wayside and trying .to core up with a new way of adopting or designating the top of the coastal bank; that being that we should take the 100 year flood elevation, tack on projected increase for sea rise level and go with that particular designation. I would urge he commission to evaluate this information very carefully because I feel that should this p;articul.ar position prevail here, that you' re setting a precedent that you may live to regret. I �Iave visited the site with CZM. I am confident that c el, through most of the site here, would not call the topo f the coastal bank the 100 year flood elevation and I feel strongly enough in my own mind that this decision has ramifications far beyond this case and that theomission ought to make a positive determination at some point. if the applicant, through their- consultant sticks with the 100 year flood elevation, I would urge the commisslon to make the positive determination that there are coastal resources but there is a boundary dispute and that dispute has not been resolved through the Request for Determination of Applicability process and that therefore it would leave -the applicant the opportunity to appeal this to DEQE, now DEP, so that the issue could be resolved at a higher ievei and perhaps through all of this, all of the various consultants will be enlightened as to how we' re going to define the top of the coastal bark. Stan, Norman and I are good friends; we have been kicking around this top of the coastal band issue for 1 years. Stan's right, people at the State level know there is a problem but no one seems to be coming down with a solution. We thought we had a solution in 1985 when Brett Bur is , former coastal geologist for the southeast regional officeg issued a document with four case types for coastal banks and we were guided by that for a number- of years and Stan has a:llUded 'to that in the report and included some diagrams of those: case types, but again, i think the co[Tvid,3sion ham to pr-ocee)d cautiotisiy here. We have been given a ciocupient of some 16 paqe-:,q with ap endi cel:,F; I have not seen the report