05/25/2000 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes

Home Browse Search

25 May 2000 Rage 8, Mr. Sherman asked if this is in the buffer zone to a coastal bark and within land subject to coastal storm flowage? IVIS Boretos stated it may not be in the 100 year flood plain; it is within a buffer zone to a coastal bank. Atty. Creeden suggested the plan is inadequate and a positive determination should issue because of that. The ether issues and concerns they had were the interruption of the storm drainage run-off with a more solid fence going in there. There are erosion problems on the coastal bank. The ether issue is wildlife disruption. NOTE: Motion made and seconded to find positive. Unanimous Vote. POSITIVE DETERMINATION. 8:00 DONALD I . S A I O for a Determination of Applicability on proposal to replace pressure-treated decking on an existing pier and float at 86 Ropponesset Island Road. Ms Boretos stated she was going to recommend Negative 2, but in light of the decision made this evening, this is in a resource area. She advised this is practically a full. rebuild of this pier and we required someone earlier to come in with a Notice of Intent to put in two pilings. Mr. Sherman stated the earlier applicant did not have any permitting, this man has a Chapter 91. It has been the Commission"s precedent, in the past, with an existing Chapter 01 license, to let rebuilding go on. There is a clause in the request. He read from same. He felt the protection equivalent to an Order of Conditions. The applicant should sign and date this section to make certain he understands it and go with a negative determination. A cover letter to be included with the Determination to emphasize the request was only to replace decking. Public comment: none. VOTE: Motion made and seconded to find negative with the stipulation that the applicant be made aware of the regulation the Agent cited. Unanimous Note. NEGATIVE DETERMINATION.