Laserfiche WebLink
22 January 1998 <br /> Page 3. <br /> Mr. E] s stated he thought that was already in the bylaw. Mr. Sherman <br /> stated it is in the bylaw but he wants to make it clear that these exemptions <br /> do not apply, the Commission would still have to be consulted, <br /> Mr. Sherman continued fisting the loopholes; Planting of native species, but it <br /> does not say anything about invasive species; conversion of lawn to uses <br /> accessory to single famfly houses, such as decks, sheds, patios and pools, <br /> without any notice. There was an attempt to compromise with the State and <br /> a request that they at least give notice, the State did not want to do this. He <br /> continued to list: Conversion of impervious to vegetated surfaces; the list is <br /> wide and especially troublesome is the. vista pruning and when they don't <br /> define walkways, they are aR important. He would be happy to revisit then <br /> but does not want to wait. He stated if the Commission does want to proceed <br /> tonight, there are a few last minute changes that are less strict. <br /> VOTE: Motion made and seconded to proceed with the hearing on <br /> regulations to the Bylaw. Unanimous Vote. <br /> Mr. Sherman proceeded to review the changes he suggested. <br /> Concerning therop osed addition under E 1, Mr. B all asked if the lot was 160 <br /> feet in length, would it still have to be out of the 100 and you could be in that <br /> o foot area? Mr. Sherman stated the Commission would have to be <br /> convinced that it is necessary to get into that first 100. if the shape of the lot <br /> would prevent doing that, this would aRow shpping into that first 100 but <br /> keeping as far back as possible. <br /> Mr. Sherman would also life to add under E 1, Board of Health as well as <br /> Board of Appeals. <br /> Perry Alis stated the Zoning Bylaw of the Town allows the use of up to 20% of <br /> the lot and asked if this regulation would go against the Bylaw and is it a <br /> problem <br /> Mr. Sherman stated it may be stricter but under State law the Commission <br /> sion <br /> cannot be less strict than State law but can be more strict under Horne Rule. <br /> It could end up on certain lots that because of this law they could not get as <br /> high as 80%. State law would not avow that under these circumstances <br /> anyway. <br /> Mr. Baker asked for an explanation in 13 and 4 about vegetated wildlife <br /> corridor for removal of pollution and sediment which tames to the m' nermost <br />