Laserfiche WebLink
Attorney Losordo made reference to photographs-dated June 2005 and Nov tuber <br /> , 2007 for Board review. He stated that the two lots are not subject to flooding and that <br /> the proposed project would not contribute to adverse-impacts-to the abutters. <br /> The Chairman then made reference to Mr. F owle r' letter dated November 7, <br /> 2007. She then asked the Applicant to respond to the.concern raised about the redirection <br /> of a portion of the ditch across Lots 80 and 8 1. <br /> Attorney Losordo responded that the older plans make reference to a redirection <br /> of the ditch; the new plans do not. He further stated that at this point Applicant's <br /> engineer believes the-are to be wetlands. <br /> 111r. Rowley informed the Board that the reference was..made because this <br /> information was-a part of package and was shown on the plan. <br /> The Chairman asked.for clarification regarding the roof runoff at the property. <br /> Attorney Losordo explained that the roof runoff`is to be collected and run into a <br /> leaching facility covered.by fabric. <br /> The Chairman interjected, asking the Applicant about discussions regarding a <br /> vegetated swail of some sort, or rain garden, in order to treat the runoff as opposed to <br /> dumping it into the ground. <br /> The Town Planner clarified that zoning 'In residential areas requires the roof <br /> r no f is to be run onto a lawn or into a vegetated swail of some sort. <br /> Attorney Losordo agreed to review this matter with Applicant's engineer. <br /> The Chairman strongly suggested consideration of a rain garden in order to allow <br /> the runoff to seep through the vegetation. <br /> Attorney Losordo agreed to investigate this.suggestion and to provide calculations <br /> to theBoard/Consulting Engineer. <br /> Mr. Rowley y requested Applicant's engineer provide him with the documents <br /> supporting his numbers. <br /> Thous O'Hara suggested this drainage treatment system be directed towards the <br /> lawn area in the back of the property. <br /> It was the general consensus of the Plaruu*ng Board Members to require a revised <br /> plan indicating the proposed drainage treatment for Board review/approval. <br />