Laserfiche WebLink
Michael said the reason he voted against approval of the plan as presented on August <br /> 22nd was that there was not enough important information on record, and while he still <br /> believes it's a complex project, at least this plan of record has enough information in it <br /> o the Commission can make good assessments in the field and be certain that the <br /> plan is followed. Important areas that should not be disturbed will not be, and where <br /> areas are disturbed, there is a plan for revegetation. There is now information in the <br /> pian to enable us to protect the natural resources that are involved. <br /> Nor. Erern expressed anger that an ICDA is filed for a complex project. <br /> Elliot said that's not true. An FDA may be filed in a situation of this sort and the only <br /> determination we make is to whether or not there are issues which must be conditioned <br /> with a Notice of Intent, because we cannot put conditions on an RDA. so if we feel we <br /> have to put additional conditions on the plan, vire may then ask for a Notice of Intent. It <br /> can be a very complicated matter or a simple matter. If it is a matter which does not <br /> require conditions such as this one, then an RDA is completely appropriate. <br /> Michael stated that had we received Mr. rerun's input and looked into this issue at the <br /> time the initial RDA was submitted, when the house was first brought up, that would <br /> have been the time to do the Notice of Intent, because that's where the significant <br /> impacts are coming. This particular RDA involves a very-minor part of that much bigger <br /> project. It's unfortunate that no input was provided at the time of the initial RDA, <br /> because that that would have been the time for the Board to issue a positive <br /> determination and request a Notice of Intent. All the important issues were permitted at <br /> that time. <br /> Mr. Erern said thea are two plans certified by Esc which shover two different coastal <br /> lines. Elliot said the only plan under consideration is the one presented at this meeting. <br /> Bert McConnell, 7 Harbor Fridge Drive, raised the issue of a series of trees with blue <br /> ribbons along the bank and his concern about removal of trees. <br /> Elliot said the only issue that is before us today over which the Commission has <br /> jurisdiction is the demolition of the cottage. If someone wants to go to court about the <br /> FDA which was issued some time ago and say there is something wrong with it, that is <br /> an option, but it is not something that can be considered at this hearing. There is <br /> nothing in the application before us tonight to remove any trees. If there are any trees <br /> removed as a result of this application, then a violation notice will be issued. <br /> Russell Loge, owner of the property, said he doesn't want there to be a <br /> misrepresentation as to what trees are coming down, because some will be. Elliot said <br /> those matters are not before the Commission tonight. <br /> Bob said the issue tonight is if we are convinced that they are not going to go back to <br /> the resources area, just the buffer zone, thea we should vote for a negative <br /> determination. If these people are not happy with that determination, the coastal bank <br /> as defined, they have the right to go to DEP and file an appeal. If they file an appeal <br />