Laserfiche WebLink
additional tern feet in order to construct a patio area. <br /> Mr. Sherpa . was concerned about further compromising the <br /> fifty foot buffer space. <br /> References were being made to the original plan/order of <br /> Conditions, Mitigation plantings having been made to the <br /> original disturbance of the fifty foot buffer. <br /> Ms. Boretos pointed out that the last remaining sassafras <br /> trees are located on this lot. She recommended the Commission <br /> deny approval/acceptance of the request for Amended order. <br /> Mr. Holmes noted any/all impacts as a result of the proposed <br /> project would be considered temporary. <br /> Ms. Boretos suggested minimizing the width of the proposal <br /> in order to maintain the original fifty foot setback; to which <br /> Michael Talbot concurred. <br /> The Conmi s s i on encouraged Applicant to revise plans <br /> maintaining the fifty foot buffer space, as was originally <br /> approved. <br /> There being no further Commission or public input, the <br /> Chairman entertained a motion. <br /> MOTION: Carol Moore made a Motion to continue this natter <br /> to March 29, 2001 at 7:40 p.m. , as requested by the -Applicant; <br /> which Motion was duly seconded and so voted unanimously. <br /> 7 :50-New Seabury Properties, LLC, to amend the order of <br /> Conditions for S -1758 to permit construction of a driveway in <br /> its originally permitted location at 233 Shore give, Assessor' s <br /> Map 123, Block 208 . <br /> Mr. Sherman provided some background information stating he <br /> had suggested amendments be made to clarify the existence of two <br /> different plans. <br /> The Chairman recognized Tom Bunker, BSS Design, who <br /> explained the project had been originally permitted under a plan <br /> designed by another firm. The work has started, the lot has been <br /> cleared and rough graded. A subsequent plan has been presented <br /> which would amend the first order of Conditions to incorporate a <br /> curve into the driveway which would prevent headlights from <br /> shining into the neighboring domes. The Amended order was <br /> issued, but not constructed, which is the reason there are two <br /> plans. Applicant wishes to revert to the original plan, <br /> requesting the use of be,lger walks or cobblestones for paving <br /> and curbing. <br /> Diane Boretos recommended approval of the Amended order and <br /> _JL _ <br />