8/6/1998 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes

Home Browse Search

6 August 1998 Page 8. Ms Ball stated there was discussion of moving the playhouse. At the request of the Commission, they have the footp t for the pool and plantings as they exist now. Plans showing plantings were distributed. As discussed, the pool apron is closer to the revetment than shown on the original pool plan; there was confusion as to which top of which coastal bank to pub the pool in. There is an issue of egress from the house also. To mitigate, she and Mr. Sherman discussed doing extensive plantings along the existing stockade fence, adding plantings along the revetment and closing off the small path with additional planting. There is a small Bath along the deck itself for maintenance of the plant. The playhouse will be moved back from the tap of the coastal bank and allowing some access for people to walk around the house and access the steps down the revetment. Vegetation to be intensified in the upper corner. Mr. Sherman asked the width of the path. Ms Ball estimated it to be no more than 2' wide. Mr. Sherman stated that would be the maximum allowed. He asked if they would have a problem with that? Ms Ball Mated no. Mr. Wirsen asked the length the apron of the pool extended? Ms Ball stated approximately 8'in one corner. Mr. Fitz mons asked haw that came to pass? Mr. She-,man stated because the plans and what happens sums to be coincidental. Ms Ball stated it is the interpretation of the plan. The pool in the original plan was to be at the tap of the coastal bank under the local bylaw and that line is obviously not the line on the site at this point. It is her understanding it does not extend beyond the limit of work at this point. Mr. Sherman believed that to be true. He was more concerned with the extension of it in terms of potential runoff over the bank and how that would be mitigated. Ms Ball stated the original pool plan called for a 2' wide, 2'_in depth french drain along two sides of the pool, as well as a drywall. Mr. Rosenberg asked of the pool is not further forward? Ms Ball stated yes. Mr. Rosenberg staffed the pool is further forward and then on top of that....... Ms Ball staffed the footprint of the pool and the patio apron around the pool is, yes. Mx. Sherman stated it is not beyond the tap of local bank. The bylaw does say we go one additional foot up, only if the slope continues to be a slope that will make it a eoastal.bank.and this doesn't. It is not an issue of it being over the top of the bank, the only issue here is runoff and the possibility of erosion.