Laserfiche WebLink
19 December 1996 <br /> Page '7. <br /> Ir. Sherman stated there are taxes owed and no Board ofIHealth approval. <br /> Mr. Grotzke stated taxes will be resolved at the closing. <br /> Mr. Lauer strongly objected to the project as it is too close to the street. Mr.- <br /> Sherman <br /> r.Sherman advised the Commission cannot deal with aesthetics, that is Board <br /> of Appeals or Architectural Review Committee issues. lir. Lauer stated the <br /> driveway is a public safety hazard. Ir. Sherman stated the Commission <br /> cannot get into that issue either, they only deal with environmental issues. <br /> Mr. Lauer asked why then was a variance being allowed from the 50 foot <br /> buffer requirement. Mfr. Sherman stated the way the bylaw is worded is that <br /> the Commission tries to get a maximum of 50 feet, but if the proponent can <br /> prove that this is impossible, which it would be on this lot, the Commission <br /> has gone down as lover as 35 feet. The Commission is not interested in <br /> hopeless court cases that would cost the town money. <br /> Mr. Lauer stated they may be subject to a suit on this, but they are going to <br /> take a stand and do what is right. <br /> The Chairman stated there are other Boards involved, the Board of Health on <br /> septic, Building on those issues, Board of Appeals on the easement and ARC. <br /> It is a cumbersome process but each group has specific responsibilities. <br /> The Agent suggested, with the number of outstanding issues, the hearing <br /> should be conti <br />