Laserfiche WebLink
I <br /> Jack said the fact that they are building a house along the coastal band is the issue that he i <br /> concerned about Michael Talbot said it affects the vVildlife value, and obviously it impacts the <br /> bank itself. <br /> Ms. Turano-Flores said 3/0 of the lot is coastal bank. She asked, "1f this is being set up for <br /> denial, has the Commission ever denied the buidabilit of a lot? Before they do so,, perhaps <br /> they would want to discuss with Bob Sherman, the staff and/or Town Counsel what the <br /> ramifications are. Jack said we certainly have made certain porfions of a lot totally unbuildable, <br /> but he doesn't know if vire ever declared an entire lot unbuildable. Ms. Turano-Flores said its a <br /> rather significant vote then. Jack said yes, every vote is significant—it affects the applicant. <br /> Every applicant's vote is important to us. <br /> Motion was made pursuant to Chapter 172, Sections 7A and 12 to deny the-applicant for failure <br /> to meet the requirements of Chapter 77 2,, failure to meet the performance standards of <br /> Regulation ulation 1 , and failure to avoid or prevent unacceptable significant cumulative.effects upon <br /> the buffer zone of Chapter 172, and a proposed work alteration with no condition for adequate <br /> protection of the wefland values of Chapter 172. This motion was seconded and unanimously <br /> carried. <br /> Alts. Turano-Flores said the motion for denial was made under the local law. The application <br /> is under both the Mate Wetlands Protection Act and the local By-law. She said the Commission <br /> is allowed to approve it under the Act and still deny it under the local -law, but the project <br /> can't go forward without approval from both. Michael Talbot said he hadn't considered that <br /> aspect. a"s concerned with the Mashpe -law—the Mate is much more lenient. <br /> Ms. Turano-Flores said usually the whole application is denied outright as an umbrella. She <br /> has litigated cases that were,approved under the Act and denied under the local -law, so <br /> 41 there was only one appeal in the Superior Court. <br /> Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to table the consideration of this project <br /> under the Wetlands protection Act. <br /> 7:40 p.m., Elliot Bloom, 41 Fiddler Crab Lane (continued from 8/5104). Cass reciused herself <br /> from this headn . Jack Vaccaro represented the applicant and presented the plan. /Michael <br /> said we generally have been using 5 ft. on center, and Mr. Vaccarb said he'd be glad to comply. <br /> Moon made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve the plan with the condition that <br /> sufficient approved plants be installed to ensure that they be b ft. on center. <br /> 7:45 p.m., Ernest Bums, 7 Cdc et Way(install prefabricated carport). The carport is in the <br /> rear of the house. <br /> Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to approve the plan. <br /> 7:50 p.m.,Willowbend Development corp. i..Le, 37 Shoestring Bay road (continued from <br /> 8/5104 . No one was present to represent the applicant. <br /> Motion made, seconded and unanimously carried to grant a continuance to September 2nd at <br /> 7:35 p.m. The applicant vAll be required to approve it. <br /> 7 <br />