Laserfiche WebLink
4 <br /> Conservation commission Jurisdiction. The demolition does not <br /> equal the ACEC Bylaw language which is "destruction" , which means <br /> this Matter is not exempt and would be subject to the Board of <br /> Appeals statute. This particular statute calls for Conservation <br /> Commission recommendations. <br /> As conveyed ed to Ms. Wilson earlier, Mr. Sherman stated his <br /> recommendation would be for an attempt to provide as close to a <br /> fifty ft, foot naturally vegetated shrub buffer as possible. <br /> He further stated the commission is unable to act upon this <br /> matter pending the Board of Appeals Hearing. He suggested <br /> recommendation based upon conceptual plans be made and forwarded <br /> to the Board of Appeals. <br /> Ms . Wilson confirmed there is no plant list other than what <br /> is noted on the plan. The original notice provides for some <br /> additional buffer including bayberry, beach plum, scotch broom, <br /> virginia rose, st. john' s wort, and low bush blueberry, as some <br /> of the kinds of plants considered to be suitable to the area. <br /> Mr. Sherman explained the planting of shrubs five ft. ) <br /> feet on center would be required, and that the areas in between <br /> be allowed to underc row naturally (with exception to the control <br /> of evasives) . He then recommended a favorable recommendation be <br /> made to the hoard of Appeals. <br /> { s . Wilson made references to the plan at this point noting <br /> the location of the deck, douse and stairs off the deck; the non- <br /> vegetated area; and the planting area. ) <br /> Ms. Wilson stated the proposed planting would bring the <br /> shrub buffer up landward of the fifty o ft. ) foot line along <br /> the north and south sides of the property line, resulting in <br /> approximately 4500 square feet of new buffer. <br /> Proposed construction of a denitrification system to the <br /> septic system has been noted on the plan. <br /> There being no public comment or further Commission <br /> discussion, the Chairman entertained a motion. <br /> MOTION: Ralph Shaw made a Motion to Close and Issue pending <br /> Board of Appeals approval; which motion was seconded by Carol <br /> Moore and so noted unanimously. <br /> 7 :55 David Cohen, 18 wheelhouse Lane, a continuance from <br /> March <br /> root <br /> arch o th, Notice of Intent . <br /> The Chairman recognized Michael trots e, The Phoenix Group, <br /> who provided a lame scale plan for presentation. <br /> Mr. Grots} e stated the proposal is for construction of a <br /> dock. Applicant has requested approval of said proposal, which <br />