Laserfiche WebLink
31 October 1996 <br /> Page 13. <br /> iers Act: Mr. Sherman stated the area needs to be shorn on all plans and <br /> the Commission should not take action on any that do not show.it. <br /> The Chairman stated contractors and the applicants do not know what is <br /> River front. <br /> Mr. Sherman stated they may not. In one of the hearings tonight, it is a creek <br /> which for % of the time is not tidal; he was there the other day at extreme <br /> high tide and it was flooring in with the tide. foes that make it estuarine in <br /> which you could take mean high wager, or does one go by wetland vegetation? <br /> If-there is no visible evidence of flood marks, they say the transition line <br /> begins at the transistion from aquatic to terrestrial plant Vie. He asked if <br /> that is Bordering Vegetated Wetland, or do they mean obligate wetland <br /> plants? That has not been clarified. <br /> Mr. Sherman advised back in 1994 here was some confusion on AC C's, a <br /> letter was received from DEP that said every resource , if in an .SCC, the <br /> performance standard becomes no adverse affect. He asked if that applies to <br /> the river front area too? <br /> Concerning a handout from Kopelrnan & Paige, there was a statement that <br /> for Chapter 9 1, the act is only 100 feet. He checked with DEP who indicated <br /> that was wrong. For a Chapter 91 project it is 100 feet but not for a non- <br /> Chapter 91 type activity. <br /> New England Wetland Plants: Mickey Marcus has offered to replace, in <br /> the Spring, any plants for the 1 lashpee River work that have expired. <br /> Luconi: A compromise has been reached. He has provided a letter that his <br /> contractor has react our lawn policy and vvffi comply with .it the future. They <br /> dict not increase the lawn, only reseeded.it. <br /> Mr. Green stated this was filed before the policy was established but then <br /> there was a no lawn policy. <br /> VOTE: Motion made and seconded to accept the letter and require any ether <br /> conditions. Unanimous Vote. <br /> Geri: The fine was appealed. At the hearing last week, it was relegated to <br /> an assistant to an assistant clerk. They decided the Commission was right <br /> but continued without a finding. They did naot fine him. They asked if vire <br /> warned them before we fined then and the Agent indicated not. He advised <br /> them it was brought to the Board and it seem such a clear contravention of <br />