Laserfiche WebLink
r <br /> S <br /> decision the owner is still willing to plant a dogwood. Mr. Casey agrees with leaving snags but not <br /> necessarily in this situation-because there is no wildlife habitat right now. He believes that the idea of <br /> leaving snags is where there is already habitat. Although the owner is willing to leave the snag, Mr. Casey <br /> feels that because there is no wildlife in the snag than it should be considered for removal. <br /> Mr. Gurnee asks about the 2nd tree and Agent McManus states that the second tree is too close to the horse, <br /> probably within 8 feet of the roof and is leafing right towards the house. This oak tree is much more Of a <br /> hazard than the pitch pine. Mr. Gurnee asks if it is also dead and Mr. Casey responds that it is not but it is so <br /> close to the house that if they were to do any ping,there would be nothing left to the tree. The <br /> maintenance pruning that is stated on the application's really to dust clear a vat from the roof st etur . <br /> Agent McManus confirms that the maintenance pruning is to keep extended branches from depositing litter <br /> on the roof and causing mold issues. Mr. Casey'states that they are also willing to plant mother tree, <br /> possibly an-Atnalanchia tree. Vice Chairman Shaw asks Mr. Casey whether he has to get approval from New <br /> Seabury as well and Mr. Casey responds that he will. Mr. Casey states that basically what he is proposing <br /> now is to remove the pine pitch and oak tree completely and replace with a dogwood and an Amalanchia. <br /> Agent McManus recommended negative determination with the following conditions: 1 One Dogwood <br /> tree to be planted to replace pitch pine 2 One Arnalanchia to be planted to replace oak tree, and(3) <br /> Maintenance pruning limited to branches overhanging the roof only. <br /> Motion made,seconded and unanimously carried for a Negative Determination with Conditions. <br /> 7:18 New S ahury Condos, RDA Shore Drive'west)Installation of 61 fence <br /> Don Monroe from Coastal Engineering is representing the applicant. This RDA is continued from August <br /> 6 and 1r. Monroe is submitting amended plans to show a survey of the mean high water line which is <br /> within 11 o of what the license by the state shows. The license plan also shows an elevation of 1.9 feet and <br /> they were being conservative and showing mean high water of 2.0. The amended plans show that FENiA <br /> established all the flood elevations for the area. The plans also show the slot grades on the revetment and <br /> also the elevation of the walkway. Vere should be a copy of an email from Dave Hili who belongs to the <br /> Division of Waterways and also issued this license which shows no provisions for preventing a placement of <br /> a fence. The license requms passage to be allowed seaward of mean high water land. Mr. Monroe feels that <br /> it should be negative detent ination on-the RDA because they are not affecting any resource area. The <br /> proposed fence will be anchored with civil-engineered posh will be done by hand. It will be a 6' high fence <br /> which they already have a sign off from the Zoning Department and it sloes not meed a building permit or <br /> board of appeals. Agent McManus-states that it will be recommended to include in the proposal a 6" <br /> clearance at the bottom to allow wildlife passage. Agent McManus also mentioned that he spoke with Dave <br /> Hill from the Department of Envirorunental Protections waterways Chapter 91 and conforms that the project <br /> is above mean.high water and that because of the size and scope of the proposed fence,it is an RDA permit <br /> and not a Notice of Intent. The fence will stretch across the walkway but is not blocking the Chapter 91 right <br /> to fish, fowl and navigate so at this time he would like to recommend a negative determination. Mr. Pin u <br /> asks what the purpose of the fence is and Agent McManus answers that it is to delineate the property lines. <br /> He asks the Board to look at the information provided and base decision on the performance standards as <br /> the l to the coastal bank and also that the fence proposes no adverse affects to the bank or the upland. <br /> � apply - <br /> Vice Chaim an Shaw asks the audience if there arc any questions and resident who is a trustee with Colony <br /> Villa asks to address the Board. He would lie to respond to the question that was asked about the purpose <br /> of the fence which he believes the actual purpose is to cut off Colony Villas' access to the beach which they <br /> have used for over 30 years. He would like to respectively ask the Board to take 30 days before permitting <br /> as they just received notice of this project yesterday at 4pm and they would like to consult with their attorney <br /> as they have serious issues with the high tide mark. if the walkway was not there, at high title the water <br /> washes up over the bank. They had tried to get a surveyor in there but New Seabury would not allow them <br /> 7 <br />