Laserfiche WebLink
He said they have moved the house. Michael Talbot said it doesn't look as though its <br /> been moved very much. Mr. Gr t ke said he has a summary and the Commissioners <br /> can look at it. <br /> Mr. trot ke said the minutes from September 3, 1998 state that footprints for the lots <br /> were roved. He hasn't been able to find minutes for the original hearing, he <br /> aske oif has found those minutes. Bob said the burden of proof is on the <br /> applicant, but Bob's opinion is that previous discussions and decisions are moot, and <br /> we have to make a determinabon now based on information we have today on the <br /> request before us now. Therefore, Bob,doesn't think it's a meaningful enterprise to <br /> look at previous deliberations and what we did in adjacent cases or n previous cases. <br /> Jack said we gave the developer an indication of how to go ahead with the ten property <br /> lots, and he thinks the developer should stick to that to the maximum extent. <br /> Bob said that Torn Counsel said that the developer has the right to ask for another <br /> interpretation that is acceptable under the performance standard -- that we have an <br /> obligation to hear what the developer Inas to say and make our deliberations based <br /> on what vire know now and based on the performance standards noir. Bob doesn't <br /> think he'soing to approve this plan, but it has nothing to do with what anent on before. <br /> Jack said he's not denying the right for the developer to have a hearing, but he has to <br /> . have some indication of what he wants to do, and that's what we did before. <br /> Elliot said he feels that if the developer wants to make a change, he is obliged to give <br /> us a reason for the change. This was a determination that was made with the assent of <br /> the applicant, since there was no appeal of it. Therefore, it stands in existence, and if <br /> thep licant wants to change the location of a house, he has to give us a good reason <br /> for the change. Elliot said that so far he has heard nothing on that issue,, and that's <br /> what would influence his decision. <br /> Michael Talbot said that additionally we have new information in that Diane has located <br /> a series of fox dens. Mr. trot ke said he moved the wetlands' limits up 9-10 ft. Bob <br /> said we are bound to consider the fox d ens, because this is a wildlife habitattwetland <br /> XWues. as expressed in chapter 172, and the proximity of alteration within a t9' Tmum <br /> 50 ft. setback (unless there is an alternative) is a very valid point. <br /> Jack stated that as soon as the work starts, the forces will move anyway. <br /> 1r. Ball said his understanding of the regulations is that the two main interests here for <br /> coastal banks are a wildlife habitat and flood control; Michael Talbot said that the <br /> Commission can take other interests that are not noted there, that our TownBy-Laws <br /> consider a buffer zone to be a resource area under our jurisdiction. Mr. Ball asked if <br /> the buffer zones have interests life any other resource area that are protected. Elliot <br /> said that"s right. <br />