Laserfiche WebLink
r 8 <br /> Paul Colombo (YES) <br /> 4—0 Unanimous <br /> 6:03 112 Waterline Drive South, Stephan and Tina Mannarino. Proposed construction of NOI <br /> new garage with one bedroom apartment with septic system upgrade to five bedroom. <br /> Representative: Marsh Matters Environmental. Assistant Agent provided rationale for <br /> continuance-zoning issues to be resolved regarding layout changes <br /> (continued from 11/16)Request to be continued to Feb. 15th at 6:39 p.m <br /> Motion to continue hearing: Steve Cook <br /> Motion seconded: Alex Zollo <br /> Discussion: Mrs Zollo asked about how much change of the project proposal would trigger <br /> a raze and replace. <br /> Roll Call Vote: <br /> Steve Cook (Yes) <br /> Sandra Godfrey (Yes) <br /> Erin Copeland (Yes) <br /> Paul Colombo (Yes) <br /> 4 —0 Unanimous. <br /> 6:06 279 Monomoscoy Road, CS Realty Trust. Proposed raze and replace of existing single NOI <br /> family home, proposed garage, shed, landscaping, walkway to existing dock and <br /> mitigation plantings. Representatives: Wet Tech Land Design, Inc. and Cauley Site <br /> Services, LLC. Resource Areas:LSCSF, buffer zone to coastal bank(armored), ACEC <br /> and Land Under Ocean <br /> The applicant representative (William Cauley-Cauley Site Services) described the proposal <br /> to the commission. Mr Cauley and Mr. Tavares (co-consultant) described how the project <br /> applies to the relevant performance standards and the request for a waiver of requirements <br /> as per Ch. 172-7(A)(3). Project site is entirely previously altered (legally). Denise Waller <br /> (sp?) of Waller Landscaping presented details on the proposed mitigation plantings and <br /> handed out colored copies of the mitigation plan to the commissioners. Mr. Tavares (Wettech <br /> LLC) commented on additional details of the proposal, adherence to relevant performance <br /> standards and the waiver request. Mr. Dale (property owner) added additional comments on <br /> his proposal as it relates to flood storage. <br /> Mr. Colombo asked for commissioner comments upon conclusion of the presentation. Mr. <br /> Cook asked about ZBA filing status and it has been approved by ZBA. Mr. Cook asked <br /> about demonstration of compelling need as it relates to the waiver request.Applicant claimed <br /> that the compelling need is to have a house that is flood zone compliant. Extended <br /> deliberation ensued between the commissioners and the consultants on the issue of <br /> demonstrated compelling need as it relates to proposed house size and proposed garage. <br /> Mr. Colombo noted that a portion of the existing seawall extends onto the abutting town <br /> owned property (town way to water) and suggested that is something we need to <br /> address/resolve and the Agent concurred. Mr. Colombo asked about rationale for a waiver <br /> under Reg. 12 (mitigation) Conservation Agent offered up clarification on the waiver request <br /> criterion overall. Mr. Cook asked about details on the proposed patio and concerns about <br /> the height of the raised patio. Additional conversation on potential flood impacts based on <br /> what's proposed. Applicant affirmed that they are adhering to building code in the flood zone <br /> with flood vents on the foundation. Additional deliberations ensued regarding impacts to the <br /> flood zone, flood waters and compliance to building code in the flood zone. Mr. Cook noted <br /> a discrepancy in the project narrative vs what was being discussed in terms of flood zone <br /> building compliance (breakaway foundation vs flood panels). Mr. Colombo asked for more <br /> specificity in regard to a breakaway foundation. Additional conversation ensued on the topic <br /> of flood zone compliance and building code. Some discussion on the existing seawall. Mrs <br />