Laserfiche WebLink
Tim Santos from Holmes and McGrath and Greg Siroonian from Rescom Architectural <br /> presented plans. <br /> Agent asked if there is any decrease of setback from a resource area. <br /> Tim Santos said yes, the existing house is approximately 50ft from the dune, the proposed <br /> house is 51 feet away. We are compensating for the increase with mitigation plantings. The <br /> coastal bank is 51ft away as well. <br /> Agent said so for both coastal bank and coastal dune you are increasing the setback by 1ft. <br /> Tim Santos said that is correct. <br /> Agent asked about any issues with dry wells. <br /> Tim Santos said the dry wells are sized accordingly for the average storm. <br /> Agent asked if driveway is impervious or any change in pitch. <br /> Tim Santos said the current driveway is shell and they are proposing gravel, and there is no <br /> change in pitch. <br /> Mr. Smith asked if they anticipate any real change in flow or drainage of storm water with the <br /> new design <br /> Tim Santos said they do not, the grades for the lot are to remain the same. <br /> Mr. Smith read a letter of concern from a member of the public, Glen McCarthy. The letter <br /> stated concerns that this project will cause further damage to the homes, roads and waters. <br /> The letter also questioned the credibility of the application. <br /> Tim Santos said the existing home at the closest is 50ft from the coastal bank and will be 51ft. <br /> The other is a setback from the southern property line, not the coastal bank. As shown in the <br /> plan, the house is not moving closer to the coastal bank. <br /> Agent asked if there is any part, not just the closest part, that is cutting into the buffer zone to <br /> coastal bank more so than the existing structure. <br /> Tim Santos replied the house is being expanded to the south, within the 100ft setback, but it's <br /> no closer than what currently exists, in that 50ft setback. So it's not going closer, it's going <br /> lateral. <br /> Agent said I understand that, but it is occupying area in a buffer zone that the current house <br /> does not occupy? <br /> Tim Santos said that is correct, but as stated earlier, there is mitigation for that and it's outside <br /> the 50ft setback <br /> Agent said he understands. Is that area naturally vegetative? <br /> Tim Santos answered it's in a lawn area. <br /> Agent commented that he understands the concerns in the letter. As always, we need to <br /> focus on the specific performance standards and if they meet or don't meet standards. While <br /> this is a larger home, no setbacks are different from the existing home. It's hard to make an <br /> argument if there's no adverse impact. The project meets performance standards. The only <br /> thing you could probably say is the reduction in groundwater recharge, but with drywells, you <br /> are supplying a means for run off to reach back into the groundwater. Our job is to look at <br /> standards and by laws. This project meets all those. No other comments. <br /> Tim Santos said that he understands concerns and opinions. This project meets the <br /> performance standards and we are hoping that this can be approved tonight from a <br /> Conservation point of view. <br /> Greg Siroonian said that Holmes and McGrath certified the existing grade. We're well aware <br /> of the district and the 30ft rule, the house was designed for that. <br /> Motion: Mr. Sweet moved to close and issue, Mr. O'Neil seconded. <br /> Vote: 5-1 motion passed <br />