4/30/1998 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes

Home Browse Search

30 Agri. 1998 Page 8. written until today and she did not receive it until today. He advised the Commission he received a call from Atty. Gildea this morning and he told her he would talk to the Building Inspector and the Secretary for the Board of Appeals to try to nail down where we are at, and he did. He was told by them, unequivocally, that they are going to assume that the two zoning bylaw sections, the fifty foot setback from the wetlands, 174-33 and the twenty five foot setback From the ACEC line which is 174, parts 84 through 8. They are going to assume they apply and Elinor Walsh specifically stated she wants the Comn3ission to render to thein an opinion regarding impacts. That is why he did so. He gave her a draft copy but it is not official, because It is from the Commission and they have to vote on it. They cannot make any kind of decision without this. There is a Catch 22 here. Atty. Gildea stated this Catch 22 has been "catchine' her bran for two months and when brought into this matter in February, with Bob Sherman and her clients, the position of the Commission at that time was that they were not going to do anything until they had Town Counsel's o union on the zoning status of these lots. It was requested that she render her oini.ou on the zoning status of these lots and she declined to Flo so because not every set of facts can be resolved by black letter law and this is a question where there are far-reaching legal consequences for decisions made by the Town with regard to these lots, because of their curious zoning history, because of Great Oak Road and it's encroachment, because of the layout of the road, it goes on and on. It has been going back and forth with continuances and what happened today was Bob faxed the language to her and she figured out the Catch 22 and that is, nobody needs to make any decision until the common ownership problem, that narrow zoning problem, is resolved by the Board of Appeals. until that problem is resolved, the AC C, the wetland and the Commission's values do not need to be addressed. She stated they need the opportunity to go before the Board of Appeals and make the case that common ownership should not work to prevent these lots. Mr. Rosenberg stated if she wants to do that, it would be appropriate for her to go to the Board of Appeals and ask then to solely issue that matter without reference to any other issues and to take up any of the other issues, such as impact or anything of that sort, only meter they have decided the first issue. Atty. Gildea. stated that was a reasonable approach for them to tape but the problem is that until that issue is resolved, the conclusion that the ACC applies is not valid. Mr. Rosenberg stated the Commission has not said that, they have said if the ACC applies.