Laserfiche WebLink
5 <br /> November 2000 <br /> Page 4. <br /> IVIS Moore asked the square footage of the house? The Chair stated it is a very small percentage <br /> of the lot. Mr. Slavinsky stated the'house is 10 s.f., the footprint. The house is squeezed up in <br /> the corner because of the vernal pool. <br /> The Chair stated they were asked to do a better job and moving it closer to the vernal pool is not <br /> a better job. Atty. Fitch stated he is still puzzled by the reading of the section of the bylaw and <br /> does not see that activity within the buffer zone is prohibited. <br /> Ms l oretos advised vernal pool buffer zone is also considered vernal pool habitat. Atty. Fitch <br /> stated it does not say that. Several months ago, the Commission conditioned a structure ' from <br /> the edge of this same-wetland. The Chair stated there are circumstances in every application <br /> that make thein all different. Atty. Fitch stated he agrees with the concepts but everything has <br /> to be looked at. To meet the performance standards, they would want'to show there is no effect <br /> on the venial pool. It is a gory small area. The applicant made the extra effort and has run into a <br /> stone wall with respect to part of this and would like to compromise. <br /> Mr. Johansen asked if the Architectural Review Committee would not grant hirn that; carte <br /> blanche,they are not going to do it? Atty. Fitch stated that is what they said. <br /> Mr.Slavimky stated they are losing about 160.s.f. and on this plan they are off 200 s.f., so the net <br /> effect is about 40 s.f. <br /> Atty. Fitch stated their charge is not to make sure that someone gets the sane size house, their <br /> charge is to protect the environ-mental resources. He asked if IVIS B retos was saying there is an <br /> absolute prohibition from any building within loo' of a vernal pool? <br /> Is Boretos read, "Around such vernal pool habitat, there shall be presumed to be a vernal pool <br /> buffer zone. This vernal pool buffer zone shall include the area within 100' of the boundary of <br /> the vernal pool habitat". Atty. Fitch stated correct,they agree there is a buffer zone. <br /> Ms Pontos stated it is to be included in ghat is called vernal pool habitat. Atty. Fitch felt she was <br /> misreading this. The interest is in defining the terms. It is within the ommission's authority to <br /> appropriately condition projects that would appear to be within a buffer zone. <br /> Mr. Rosenberg stated the Commission may enforce the buffer zone. It is possible the <br /> Commission may, in some instances,find a reason not to enforce it but does have the authority to <br /> enforce the buffer zone unless they can show that the Commission has no such authority. <br /> Atty. Fitch stated the buffer zone does not prohibit activity. IVIS Boretos stated when you look at <br /> the performance standards, it speaks to alteration of topography, hydrology and vegetation. <br /> Atty. Fitch added,within the habitat. Ms Poretos stated the habitat, as she just react,includes the <br /> 100' buffer around the certified vernal pool. Atty. Fitch disagreed. Their reason for coming back <br /> was to try to show that they have acted in good faith and this gentleman would like to get a little <br /> something back because he could not do exactly as the Commission had urged,although he tried. <br /> Public comment: none. <br /> VOTE: Motion made and seconded to deny the application. Unanimous Vote. <br />