Laserfiche WebLink
19 December 1996 <br /> Page 8. <br /> Public comments: none. <br /> VOTE: lotion made and seconded to close pending T; . <br /> CLOSED PENDING II . <br /> 8:50 NEW SEABURY CONDOMINIUM TRUST lA AND 1B for <br /> expansion and repair of an existing rough stone revetment at Tidewatch <br /> Condomunum 'Frust to include reb- *h]; a 40 foot section of storm damaged <br /> coastal bank at 94 Shore Drive West. Abutter notification receipts were <br /> provided.. Norman Hayes presenting. <br /> 11ITr. Sherman advised there has been erosion and damage to the ' d.ewatch <br /> revetment. All of the proposed work is reasonable. He looped at this with <br /> DEP who had no problems with it. They went through a new Notice of latent <br /> because the perpetuity language was not clear. Things can get worse their <br /> quite rapidly. <br /> Mr. Mayes advised the access road to the site is under an Order of Conditions <br /> for beach nourishment which requires that it be repaired in perpetuity, <br /> whoever uses it. The existing revetment is under SE 43-1166. Because of <br /> storms, they need to repair under the existing Order of Conditions and put <br /> 150 feet of additional toe stones. They have all permits and work to be clone is <br /> above Mean Nigh Water. In accordance with a suggestion by lion Potter of <br /> Chapter 91, if it is found in the as-built survey that the new toe stones touch <br /> Mean High Water, a request for jurisdictional review will be wed.. They will <br /> revegetate and maintain it. <br /> Mr. Rosenberg asked the amount of fill to be used behind the revetment? Mr. <br /> Hayes stated it may be 2 c.y. but probably 50 or 199 c.y. in the big hole <br /> created by the storm water coming over the bank. <br /> Mr. Sherman asked who owns the adjoining lot. Aft. Mayes stated that is the <br /> New Seabury access road. Mr. Sherman asked if he had a letter of permission <br /> from thein? Mr. Mayes stated they are required to do this work under the <br /> Order of Conditions for the regional beach nourishment plan but Chris <br /> Burden is requiring that it be repaired. A letter from New Seabury was <br /> requested. Also, Mr. Sherman asked if the Notice of Intent lists this property <br /> and it did not. Mr. Hayes agreed to revise the cover page of the Notice. <br /> Mr. Rosenberg asked if the old order provides for the maintenancc Mr. <br /> Hayes stated it is allowed in the current order. <br />